The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts, the court below did not recognize that the defendant had been raped even if it was sufficiently recognized, and there was an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence on the assertion of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, and confiscation) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In light of the facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court, the lower court determined that it was difficult to view that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was insufficient to have proved without reasonable doubt that the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim by assaulting or threatening the victim to the extent that it is impossible or considerably difficult to resist. 2) In a criminal trial, the conviction should be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to ensure that the judge is true enough to have a reasonable doubt. If there is no such proof, even if there is no doubt as to the guilt of the Defendant, the conviction cannot be determined (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001; 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006; 2006; 2005Do8675, Apr. 1, 2006; 2006; and 3) the appellate court’s judgment has the nature of a criminal trial after the fact of witness examination in light of the substantive psychological or examination.

Even if it does not reach the degree of sufficient resolution of reasonable suspicion caused by the first instance trial, it is insufficient to prove the crime solely due to such circumstance.