All of the appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of fact-finding 1) On November 201, 2013, the part against the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a minor similar act under the age of 13) and the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a indecent act in relation to relatives) are limited to “victim” (a).

[2] The Defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) are limited to the Defendant

The judgment of the court below acquitted the victim of this part of the charges on the ground that it was more reliable in the first victim's statement, but it was erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles on special cases concerning the punishment of sexual crimes (i.e., acts of minor age), violations of special cases concerning the punishment of sexual crimes (i.e., acts of minor age), violations of special cases concerning the punishment of sexual crimes (i., acts of minor age), violations of special cases concerning the punishment of sexual crimes (i.e., acts of indecent act) and the acts of giving rise to the victim's sexual organ, even if the victim had committed an indecent act, it is unfair to determine that the victim's own act was committed during the same act as the time and place different. However, there is no consistency in part of the victim's statement. However, considering that the victim's statement was made in the process of making an oral use of the victim's statement after his/her birth or making a statement in his/her speech, there is no possibility of misunderstanding the victim's first statement in the court.