The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on evidence with probative value that makes the judge feel true beyond reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, the doubt of guilt is against the defendant even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(2) In light of the facts stated in its reasoning, the court below found the Defendant not guilty of the charges of this case on the following grounds: (a) each statement made at the investigation agency of the victim C and the court of first instance and the court below are inconsistent with the facts acknowledged by objective evidence; (b) the credibility of the statements made at the investigation agency of the victim C and the court of first instance and the court below are inconsistent with the facts established by objective evidence; and (c) the evidence produced by the evidence of guilt in the court of first instance alone alone is insufficient to acknowledge the facts charged of this case.

In light of the above legal principles and records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the credibility of the statement, or in the misapprehension of facts beyond the bounds of the free evaluation of evidence.

Therefore, the appeal is therefore filed.