The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles) permits a defendant to enter the "the "the "the "the "the "the "head" room" in the facts charged, but at the time of the facts charged, the defendant explained the reason why the defendant was entering the "the child-care center" in the facts different from the facts to the victim, the defendant's act was contrary to the normal behavior form by breaking the defendant even though he was in the situation of leaving the school, and the defendant's act was against the normal behavior form by making the defendant's act to find out the "the "the "the "the "the "head" who was allowed to enter the military," and eventually reported the "the "the "the" child-child-related misconduct to the military office thereafter, even if the defendant was "the "the "the "the "the "the "the" room" that was allowed to enter the military office

2. The lower court determined that: (a) in light of the fact that all child care teachers, including the Defendant, including the Defendant, had a card capable of cancelling the compact for child care centers, they could have access to child care centers at night, if necessary; (b) the Defendant, on December 4, 2014, went to a child care center and entered the child care center on a normal basis at around 20:07; (c) did not use abnormal methods or routes; and (d) the office used all infant care teachers, including the victim, as the principal office used them as office space, and thus, the Defendant was also allowed to have access to the meeting.

It is reasonable to see that G and H first go to the Gun office at the investigative agency at “(day) 5 p.m.,” and F went to the Gun office at the later time.

A A A, a person in charge of the military administration, he/she recorded.

In order to look into the file, fluencing him, and asking for the "data". This answer.

(a) An employee of the Gun Office.