The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below acquitted the defendant of this case on the ground that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor was insufficient to prove the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

However, the court below stated as the ground for not guilty, ① in the court of the court below, ② in the cell phone of the defendant, which was seized and analyzed by the police immediately after the instant case, that the video and photograph files have not been discovered (Evidence No. 82-89 of the record) taken on the day of the instant case, and ② the defendant consistently stated that “the defendant entered the public toilet for women while under the influence of alcohol,” and even in addition to the circumstances stated by the police, D's evidence alone cannot be deemed as proven without reasonable doubt that the facts charged of the instant case that the defendant invadedd in a female toilet for the purpose of meeting the sexual desire, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.