The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the prosecutor’s appeal grounds (misunderstanding of facts) consistent with the statement from the investigative agency to the court of the court below to the effect that “the victim D was under physical contact with the defendant who was in a usually friendly manner as the defendant,” and there is no motive to dismiss the defendant, and even if the defendant was not sexual contact at all, the victim’s report to the defendant to the Gap 112 is not consistent with the rule of experience. In light of the above, the victim’s statement that the defendant was forced to commit an indecent act may be acknowledged as credibility of the victim’s statement that the defendant was forced to commit an indecent act.

Nevertheless, the lower court rejected the credibility of the victim’s statement and rendered a not-guilty verdict on the facts charged in this case, thereby misleading the facts and adversely affecting the judgment.

2. The judgment below reversed the defendant's first 112's statement that "D only reported the defendant as assaulting the crime of assaulting the defendant, "I am drinking at the home of the reporter, am drinking, and am drinking," but at the time of the first investigation by the police, the defendant stated that "the defendant was her left chest of the bar with her hand, and the defendant was her chest at the left chest of the bar." At the police's second investigation, the court below reversed the defendant's statement that " When the defendant's hand was her clothes on the side of the defendant's hand, etc., and only once she was her chest, and the defendant believed that "at the bar of the defendant's hand was her breast, and her body was her body and her body was frighted, and it was hard to see the defendant's opinion because she made a statement because she did not have any consistency in his body or her body's body."