The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the consistent statement of the victim in the gist of the grounds for appeal, the victim’s gene appraisal report, etc., where the defendant was found to have committed a quasi- indecent act by compulsion, such as the entries in the facts charged, the court of first instance that acquitted the defendant on the facts charged, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2. Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “The recognition of a criminal fact shall reach a proof to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.”

Therefore, the conviction in a criminal trial should be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt.

In a case where the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone does not reach the degree of conviction, the determination should be made with the benefit of the defendant even if there is a suspicion of guilt.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 92Do1405 Decided September 1, 1992; 2016Do21231 Decided October 31, 2017, etc.). Examining the evidence duly admitted and examined in the first instance court based on the aforementioned legal doctrine in light of the records, the court of first instance determined that the crime was not proven to the purport that “the victim’s statement concerning the situation at the time of the incident is an ambiguous statement, and the victim’s memory, which was the basis of the victim’s statement, is not easy to give high credibility, and it cannot be ruled out that the victim’s gene was discovered in the victim’s bloke, and it cannot be concluded that the Defendant committed an indecent act because of the victim’s chest as stated in the facts charged.”