The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is indicated in the facts charged by the Defendant as “the above victim’s age of 11 or 12 at the time,” but according to the statement on the 123th page of the evidence record, the above victim was acknowledged as “11 or 12 years old at the time of the instant case,” which was “the victim’s age of 11 or 12 years old at the time of the instant case,” and such correction was ex officio made.

The Defendant is the mother of his family, and the head of his mother D (hereinafter “the house of this case”) located in Seosan-si, Sinsan-si, in 2013, had the victim’s family meetings together with the victim’s family members, and had locked from his family and the victim’s living room.

The Defendant, around the same day, committed an indecent act against the victim divinging around the same day, putting his fingers into the inside of the victim's side, booming him as being in charge of the victim's hair and chest, continuously putting his fingers into the victim's sexual organ, booming his fingers under the victim's reflect, and putting his fingers into the victim's sexual organ, raising his fingers into the victim's sexual organ.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an act of inserting the fingers of the victim's sexual intercourse by using the victim's state of resistance impossibility of resistance against the victim under 13 years of age.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the Defendant’s and his defense counsel’s assertion did not seem to have been sleeped with the victim at the slick house of this case in around 2013, and there was no sleep with the victim. Thus, the Defendant did not engage in any act identical to the facts charged in the instant case

B. The recognition of facts constituting an offense in the relevant criminal trial ought to be based on strict evidence of probative value, which leads to a judge to have a reasonable doubt. Therefore, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that such conviction would lead to the prosecutor’s conviction, it is doubtful that the Defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable.