2. In full view of the following circumstances admitted by the court below as evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the grounds for appeal, the measures that the court below rendered a judgment not guilty of the facts charged of this case are justified, and it cannot be said that there were errors of mistake of facts as alleged by the prosecutor, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below:

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is not accepted.

① In the case of intrusion on July 18, 2017, when the Defendant was unable to know whether the victim was out of the room of this case due to two contacts with the victim, the Defendant attempted to contact with the victim several times and tried to find out the room of this case several times, and opened the entrance door of the room of this case where no response was reached, which appears to have occurred in the process of confirming whether the victim was out of the room of this case.

② In the case of intrusion on July 19, 2017, the victim stated in the court below that “the defendant left the room with female employees” in the court below.

③ However, in the initial police investigation, the victim divided the first race of the room of this case around 09:10 on July 19, 2017, and the victim first opened his clothes while he had been under command while he had been under command, and the defendant could not have reported the form of the victim.