The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal, the credibility of the victim's statement is sufficiently recognized, and there is an error of misconception of the fact that the court below acquitted the defendant, even though the defendant was found to have committed a crime when he was the victim.

2. Determination:

A. On July 7, 2013, at around 03:20 on July 7, 2013, the Defendant was the victim and the Si expenses for the reason that the victim D was her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her hers face, and the Defendant her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her with.

As a result, the Defendant assaulted the victim H in collaboration with F, G, and E, added approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim D, added a head cover open address, and added approximately two weeks of treatment to the victim I.

B. The lower court rendered a more specific statement on July 7, 2013, which corresponds to the facts charged in the instant case, that the victim D and H made each statement, i.e., the following circumstances, i., D, on the rise of fighting match, stated on July 7, 2013, that “I face with male and shoulderer in Mongoliaon (in the instant case, 58 pages).” On July 11, 2013, upon receiving the second interrogation from the police on the second time, the lower court made a more specific statement (171 pages of the investigation record) that “I face with the male (the Defendant) who was flicked with the shoulder,” and again re-written the statement that “I face with female and female” (173 pages of the investigation record). This appears to have been for the purpose of convokinging the crime of indecent act by force against one’s own E by force.