The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (the factual error and inappropriate sentencing)

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor claiming a mistake of facts, the court below acquitted the defendant on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, although the defendant could sufficiently recognize the intention of escape.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the assertion of unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment without prison labor, two years of suspended execution, and eight hours of social service) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In a criminal trial on the assertion of mistake of facts, the recognition of facts must be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof does not sufficiently reach the degree to have such conviction, even if the defendant’s assertion or vindication is contradictory or uncomfortable, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 201). In addition, in light of the fact that the criminal appellate trial has the character as ex post facto trial even though it belongs, and the spirit of substantial direct cross-examination as prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Act, etc., in view of the fact that there is insufficient evidence to exclude a reasonable doubt after undergoing the examination of evidence, such as the examination of witness, and thus, it is difficult to conclude that the court below erred in its judgment by 2011 if there is sufficient doubt or doubt as to some opposing facts as a result of the appellate trial’s examination, and that it does not reach a reasonable doubt (see Supreme Court Decision 2121614).