All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (guilty) did not commit an indecent act by force against the victims as stated in the facts charged in this part, and the statements made by the victims and other witnesses are not consistent or are not reliable. Thus, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty as evidence of the victims’ statements, etc. was erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court (an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program for a period of 1 June and 40 hours) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. As stated in the facts charged, the prosecutor (not guilty part) may be found guilty of the facts charged in light of the following: (a) the victims of the misunderstanding of the facts have made a specific and consistent statement that they had committed an indecent act from the Defendant; and (b) there are no special circumstances that the victims would make a false statement to the Defendant.

The judgment of the court below which acquitted each of the above facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts by the defendant and the prosecutor

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims Thereof is established when a indecent act is committed against a person under his/her protection or supervision due to his/her duties, employment, or other relation. In this case, “a person under his/her protection or supervision due to his/her duties, employment, or other relation” includes not only those who are under his/her duty or supervision due to his/her internal rules, etc. but also those who may have a substantial influence on his/her duties, employment, etc. within the workplace (see Supreme Court Decisions 74Do1519, Feb. 10, 1976; 2009Do6800, Sept. 24, 2009); and “power” refers to force.