The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The Defendant committed an indecent act against C in the former and the latter.

2. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: around March 15, 2016, the Defendant: (a) around 18:13, at the high speed terminal station in Seocho-gu Seoul, New Distribution, Seocho-gu, Seoul, 188 subway 9, carried out in the crebs of passengers concentrated on the electric trains operated in the direction of the Definite calendar station.

After C(n, 19 years of age), the Defendant’s sexual flag is sealed to C’s her her mm, and the Defendant’s her mar was committed in her former her mar, which is a means of public transportation, for about five minutes until her mar arrive in the old mar calendar by means of rain.

3. The lower court’s judgment, based on the following circumstances that can be acknowledged by the evidence of the lower court, is difficult to believe that the statements of C, D, and E, consistent with the fact that the Defendant committed an indecent act against C, and the remaining evidence, such as documentary video CD, are insufficient to recognize it.

In light of the above, the defendant was acquitted.

(1) Even by virtue of the documentary film CD, the Defendant, at the same time, who was subsequent to C, does not seem to be tightly adhered to C’s butther her sexual flag, as indicated in the facts charged.

② D/E, a traffic control police officer, took place with the Defendant since the Defendant was able to commit an aquatic indecent act that appears to be characterized by a sexually indecent act while waiting for his/her former vehicle, and thereafter, he/she testified to the effect that he/she witnessing that the Defendant committed an indecent act against C under the ordinary water law that helps the body part of C and arrested the Defendant as a flagrant offender.

However, it is difficult to trust the police officers’ judgment as to whether to commit an indecent act in light of the fact that the police officers’ aforementioned determination is based on the subjective and empirical trend and is not necessarily correct, and that the Defendant did not actively attempt to capture the parts of the body or not doing any act, etc.

③ Also, in the court of the court below, ‘the physical contact with the defendant's body' is an indecent act against the defendant.