The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the prosecutor’s grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) is consistent to the purport that E was exposed to the Defendant’s inside and outside of the arms in the investigative agency and the court, thereby causing sexual humiliation. In light of the following: (a) the Defendant stated at the police that E did not have any fact when he was under interrogation of the first time; and (b) the Defendant reversed the Defendant’s statement that E was put in arms at the second time when he was under interrogation of the suspect; (c) but (d) it is inconsistent with the Defendant’s consistent statement that E was clearly stated that “at the same time, he did not mathing work.”

Nevertheless, the court below rejected the credibility of the E’s statement and acquitted the facts charged in this case, thereby erroneous determination of facts.

2. In order to reverse the judgment of the court below that rejected the credibility of E’s statement, which is the evidence supporting the facts charged in the instant case, the judgment of the court below should be sufficiently and sufficiently acceptable, and most of the circumstances required in the grounds of appeal should not be seen as circumstances to the extent that the judgment of the court below is not acceptable, such as where most of the circumstances in the grounds of appeal were already pointed out in the trial process of the court below and considered in the process of the judgment of the court below.

The court below stated that "E was suffering from the tensions at the time (No. 13 pages of No. 2 of the Record of Evidence)" in the police, "E was said to go to F while leaving the school room immediately after this week (No. 12 of the Record of Evidence No. 12)" and in the court of the court of the court below, "I got to go to the school room, and the F's son, the witness of the school room, was drank."