The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below acquitted the injured party on the grounds of appeal, although the injured party clearly and consistently stated the damaged facts and the photograph and video conforms to the statements of the injured party, and sufficiently recognized the facts charged.

The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The lower court, among the victim’s legal statements, found that the victim’s spucks, above the victim’s sbucks on the outside part of the middle of the bucks, spucks caused the Defendant’s fingers to contact.

It is difficult to eliminate the possibility that the Defendant’s hand, etc., who was seated by the victim, might be mistaken due to an intentional indecent act with the victim’s intent to commit a crime. It is difficult to conclude that the victim’s statement alone committed an indecent act against the victim, such as the Defendant’s intentional act with the intent to commit a crime, is insufficient to prove the facts charged.

In light of the above, innocence was pronounced.

Examining the evidence of this case in light of the record, the lower court is justifiable to have determined that the Defendant was not guilty on the ground of the determination of evidence as above (the photographs and videos submitted by the public prosecutor were taken by the injured person after the injured person resisted against the Defendant and attempted to mislead the Defendant, and it does not constitute direct evidence to acknowledge the facts charged). The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts pointed out by the public prosecutor

shall not be deemed to exist.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.