The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of three million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error or the misapprehension of the legal principle), the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, although the defendant could sufficiently recognize the facts of indecent act by compulsion as stated in the facts charged.

2. An ex officio determination prosecutor filed an application for permission to amend an indictment with the following facts charged as stated in the facts constituting a crime: (a) while maintaining the previous facts charged around the appellate court; (b) the applicable provisions of the Act as “Assault”; and (c) applying for permission to amend an indictment with the same contents as stated in the facts constituting a crime under Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act; and (d) the subject of

However, as seen below, as long as this court found the Defendant not guilty of indecent act by compulsion, which is the primary facts charged, as the court below found the Defendant guilty of assault, which is the ancillary facts charged, the court below’s judgment that only is the primary facts charged, could no longer be maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal principles on the primary facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

3. In light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged in the instant case on the ground that it is difficult to deem that the evidence alone submitted by the prosecutor alone was proved to have committed an indecent act by indecent act by compulsion without reasonable doubt.

Examining the above judgment of the court below after comparing it with the records, the judgment of the court below is justified, and it is erroneous or erroneous as otherwise alleged by the prosecutor.