The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

provided that this ruling has become final and conclusive.

1. On September 5, 2014, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act on the Abuse of Occupational Authority, etc.) (hereinafter “violation of Sexual Exposure”) among the facts charged in the instant case, and found the Defendant not guilty of the remainder of the violation of each sexual law.

Accordingly, when the defendant filed an appeal against the guilty portion, the prosecutor accepted the defendant's appeal against the guilty portion and reversed the appeal and rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal by the prosecutor.

When a prosecutor files an appeal against the whole judgment of the party before remanding, the Supreme Court dismissed the prosecutor's appeal against the part not guilty (the remainder of the judgment of the court below's grounds for appeal against violation of the law by force). However, the part which the court prior to remand reversed the judgment of the court below which found guilty and acquitted the defendant (the part of the judgment of the court below's judgment against violation of law by force around September 5, 2014) was reversed and the judgment of the court remanded to the court of appeal.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below on September 5, 2014, with the exception of the fact of violation of each sexual law (dedecent act) around September 5, 2014, is already separately and finally decided, so the judgment of this court is limited to the violation of each sexual law (dedecent act) around September 5, 2014 among the judgment below.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (Defendant 1) are not consistent with the victim’s statement in major parts, and according to the statement in the calendar of business affairs submitted by the defendant at the original trial and the recording of the statement in AS by a witness at the trial prior to remand, the defendant was undergoing a job interview at the employee office at around 10:20 on September 5, 2014, and on the same day at around 18:10 on the same day, it is recognized that the victim had already left the office and had no office (Defendant 1).