A. According to the statement of the victim and the contents of the recorded conversations between the defendant and the victim of the facts (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below), the court below acquitted the defendant as to each of the facts charged although the defendant could fully recognize the facts by deceiving the victim as stated in each of the facts charged, by deceiving the victim, and by threatening sexually related video dynamics, thereby passing the money. The court below acquitted the defendant as to each of the facts charged. This part of the judgment of the court below

B. The lower court’s sentence that is unfair in sentencing (700,000 won) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts is justified in holding that each part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of the facts charged, and the court below erred in the misapprehension of facts as pointed out by the prosecutor, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of the above facts is without merit.

B. The instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing is deemed to have been committed by assaulting the victim who had a relation with the Defendant at the time of such crime and the degree of assault, etc.; however, in light of the content of the crime and the degree of assault, the liability for the crime does not seem to be light, but on the other hand, the Defendant appears to have committed a misunderstanding, and the degree of assault does not seem to have been serious, and the degree of assault does not seem to have been too serious, and in light of all the conditions of sentencing specified in the instant argument, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, etc., it does not seem that the sentence imposed by the lower

Therefore, there is no reason for the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing.

3. As such, the Prosecutor’s appeal is without merit, and thus, the Criminal Procedure Act.