All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (as to the guilty portion in the original judgment), was unilaterally assaulted by D and F, and did not assault F as stated in the lower judgment, and there was a partial exercise of tangible power in the process.

This is merely a passive defensive act to escape from D/F assault.

B. Prosecutor 1) In the event of mistake of facts (as to the acquittal portion in the original judgment), the business place operated by the victim at the time of committing the instant crime is not a business place of arranging sexual traffic, and thus, it constitutes a business subject to protection of the crime of interference with business. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing (as to the suspended sentence of KRW 500,000 won

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court in determining the Defendant’s assertion, namely, (i) D and F statements that the Defendant used to assault D as stated in the lower judgment’s judgment from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court in relation to this part of the facts charged; and (ii) the F’s upper part of the materials attached to the report on internal investigation also appears to correspond to D and F’s statements, the Defendant may sufficiently recognize the facts of assaulting D as stated in the lower judgment.

In addition, in light of the aforementioned details and contents of the assault and the degree of the tangible power exercised, the Defendant’s act constitutes self-defense as an act with considerable grounds for defending an unfair infringement against himself/herself.

It does not seem that it is a legitimate act that is merely a passive defensive act and can be permitted by social norms.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. Judgment 1 on the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts