Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the ex officio judgment prosecutor.

The prosecutor maintains the facts charged of the existing quasi-indecent act by compulsion as the primary charges and maintains the name of the crime as the “Attempted quasi-indecent act by compulsion” and the applicable provisions of the law as “Articles 300, 299, and 298 of the Criminal Act” and the facts charged are below.

C. (1) As stated in the “a summary of the facts charged in the preliminary charge”, an application for amendment to a bill of indictment was filed, and the same was added by the court. However, since the prosecutor’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles regarding the primary facts is still subject to the judgment of the court, the following shall be examined in order to examine the prosecutor’s grounds for appeal as to the primary facts and the ancillary facts added by this court. (b) The lower court found the prosecutor’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles as to the primary facts in light of the circumstances revealed by the records of this case, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor (only the victim’s statement alone is difficult to deem that the Defendant intentionally committed an indecent act as shown in the primary facts charged by force majeure

In addition to the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s judgment is determined.