The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the statement of the first police statement on the victim with the content of the facts charged in detail that corresponds to the summary of the grounds for appeal, according to the statement on the facts charged by the defendant at the time of the first police statement on the victim, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant rapes the victim and sexual intercourses the victim in an un

In light of the fact that the time to reverse the victim's statement was not more than three days after the date of detention of the defendant, and that the mother of the victim was psychologically and psychologically pushedly closely and the attitude of expressing the victim for the defendant, etc., it is in accord with the rule of experience to view that the victim's subsequent statement is false by coercion or meeting of the mother of the victim.

In light of the fact that F’s statement that denies admissibility of evidence at the court below is the fact that the defendant was detained and the defendant consulted about the crime of this case to F who was confined in the same confinement room, the admissibility of evidence can be sufficiently recognized, and that F’s statement also conforms to the facts charged, since F’s statement is sufficiently reliable under Article 316(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The court below's decision is that the F's statement in the prosecutor's office and the F's statement in this court are hearsay statements or a statement in the F's professional statement, the contents of which are the Defendant's statement, and the admissibility of evidence is recognized only for "when the statement is made under particularly reliable circumstances" pursuant to Article 316 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is difficult to see that the F's statement in the prosecutor's office and in this court is made under particularly reliable circumstances only with the F's statement in this court.

In light of the above, admissibility of evidence was not admitted.

B. The court below held that the direct evidence corresponding to the facts charged in this case is the victim.