All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In fact-finding, the Defendant was aware of the fact-finding with male shower room due to his care, and entered a female shower room. Therefore, even though the Defendant did not have any criminal intent to intrude into the shower room of this case, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact, thereby convicting the Defendant. 2) The sentencing division (the original court: KRW 5 million) in the sentencing division (the fine of KRW 5 million)

(b) Sentencing and police officer (a fine of five million won is imposed);

2. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts in detail, on the ground that the Defendant asserted the same as the grounds for appeal of this case, and the lower court stated in the judgment that “a judgment on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion” was “a judgment on the Defendant and

In this context, the following circumstances recognized by the trial court are as follows: ① from May 2017 to May 201, the Defendant’s entry into the shower room prepared side of the shower room was the first day of the instant case, but the shower room is divided. However, it appears that the Defendant, who first found the shower room, should have confirmed that he was a male shower room; ② In addition, the Defendant was in the situation where the door of the shower room was closed at the time of entering the shower room of the instant case; ② If the Defendant was in the situation where he was to open and open the shuter room, he should have paid more attention if he was in the door of the shower room located side of the instant case, but (According to the defense counsel’s assertion, the distance between the shower room and the Defendant’s cell phone was merely about 16 cm, but it was difficult to view that the Defendant was a woman’s cell phone and the CCTV room of the instant case.