The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as misconception of facts (not guilty part) and the victim’s statement, the court below found the defendant and the respondent for probation order (hereinafter “defendant”) guilty of this part of the facts charged, although it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant and the respondent for probation order committed an indecent act against the victim with mental disorder by force. Thus, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles and misconception

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. On July 21, 2018, the Defendant, at the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Eel on Fel on July 21, 2018, off the clothes of the victim G (n, 53 years old), who is a mentally disabled person, and even though the victim resisted, she met the victim's chest, sound, and the part of the port.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the victim with mental disability by force.

B. The facts constituting the elements of a crime prosecuted in a criminal trial are the prosecutor’s burden of proof, whether it is a subjective element or an objective element (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do7377, Aug. 30, 2012). The recognition of a crime ought to be based on strict evidence with probative value, which makes a judge not to have any reasonable doubt. Thus, where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the degree of sufficient doubt, it should be determined as the defendant’s benefit even if there is suspicion of guilt, such as the inconsistency of the defendant’s assertion or defense or the absence of doubt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 2011).