The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the victim’s consistent statement or the Defendant’s speech and behavior, etc., the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and acquitted the Defendant.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts (not guilty part) the lower court: (i) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated; (ii) the time and place of the instant case were lower time and was open to the public; (ii) the Defendant drawn up the victim did not have any particular physical contact or physical power other than the upper part, due to a brightness between the ship and the chest; and (iii) particularly, Article 1-b of the facts charged.

In the case described in paragraph (2), the victim seems not to have made a direct physical contact with the victim when entering the life jackets. ④ The defendant and the victim had a close relation within the childcare center until the occurrence of the above case. ⑤ The victim made a statement at the J center after the commission of the crime (the part concerning the charge in paragraph (2)) committed on April 24, 2018. The victim started to refer to this part of the case that was around July 8, 2014 and August 10, 2016. The victim mentioned above. 6 The victim had been accepted as a pro-Japanese mark in addition to the above case, although the defendant had frightd to her own proposal, the victim thought that the degree of the above case was more serious than that of the defendant's behavior. According to the above sexual statement, the victim stated to the purport that the above case was sexually stated to the effect that "........"