The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

40 hours against the defendant.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the fact that the defendant committed an indecent act by exercising the force of force sufficiently to the extent that the victim cannot resist.

Even if the defendant's act does not constitute "indecent conduct"

Even if the defendant committed an indecent act by fraudulent means against a person under his/her protection and supervision.

full recognition may be accepted.

Therefore, the court below should have ordered the prosecutor to change the indictment, and sentenced the defendant not guilty immediately without requiring any changes in the indictment.

2. The prosecutor of the Amendments to Bill of Indictment maintains the facts charged of the existing indecent act as the primary facts charged, and the following facts charged, and the name of the crime, “Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes by Occupational Force)” and the applicable legal provision, “Article 10(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes,” were applied in the first instance trial, and the court granted permission.

As seen below, the judgment of the court below that only the previous primary facts charged can no longer be maintained, inasmuch as the court found the defendant not guilty of the primary facts charged and found the defendant guilty of the ancillary facts charged.

However, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake as to the primary facts charged is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Judgment on the primary facts charged

A. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the director of the “C church” in the military assembly B, and the victim D (V, 54 years old) is the believers of the above church.

The defendant, on September 2013, was parked in the church parking lot that was parked in the military police around early 2013, where the name of the military police is unknown.