All appeals filed by B and prosecutor are dismissed.

A. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of facts) The Defendant, as the head of the instant child care center, performed considerable care and supervision to prevent child abuse by A, a child care teacher, as the head of the instant child care center. (2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (5 million won of a fine) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence (Defendant A: imprisonment with prison labor for six months, and two years of suspended execution) against the Defendants by the prosecutor is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Defendant B’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts as indicated in the judgment of the court below, as follows: ① Solomon team of the child care center of this case to which the victim belongs is the class of the child of the age group who is the most difficult to me as the class of the child of the child of 3 years old; ② A was employed as a Solomon team before the accident of this case occurred; ② A was employed as a child care teacher two months prior to the occurrence of the accident of this case; ③ A was in a state of lack of career as a child care teacher; ③ was in a state of being in a state of having been in a state of having been in a state of having been in a state of being in a state of having been in a state of having been in a state of having been in a state of having been in a state of flag by flaging the other source of child care even before the occurrence of this case; ④ Therefore, the Defendant was a child care teacher and supervision over the Solomon team of this case after the above case, but it is difficult to view the Defendant’s act of child abuse.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just, and the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing against Defendant A, the Defendant ought to be absolutely protected and be safely protected against the victim of three years of age.