The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of indecent act by force, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of indecent act by force, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, even though the defendant acknowledged the victim's intentional negligence on the part of the victim as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

2. In light of the judgment, even if physical contact was made during a short period of time as an open place, it may constitute indecent act by compulsion (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Do17879, Jul. 23, 2015). Thus, the prosecutor’s argument that the Defendant’s act of contact with the victim’s teared Cheongbane part constitutes indecent act is correct.

However, in full view of all the circumstances decided by the court below, such as the victim's physical part, degree and time of contact, surrounding circumstances at the time of the case, and the defendant's intent to conceal from the above, the defendant's act constitutes an indecent act which objectively causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is contrary to sexual morality.

The lower court’s determination that it is difficult to readily conclude that the Defendant had a criminal intent to commit an indecent act is justifiable and acceptable. In so doing, it did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.