The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged of this case on the ground that "the purpose of inducing or meeting his or another person's sexual desire" was recognized at the time of the act of this case, is erroneous by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

2. The prosecutor bears the burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial. The conviction must be based on the evidence of probative value that leads a judge to believe that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. If there is no evidence to establish such a degree of conviction, even if there is no doubt as to the defendant's conviction, the defendant's interest should be determined (see, e-mail, Supreme Court Decision 99Do4305, Feb. 25, 2000, etc.). In light of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below acknowledged that the defendant sent the victim with a message of the same content as the facts charged in the instant case. However, in order to establish obscenity by using a communication medium, it is necessary to "the purpose of inducing or satisfaction with himself or another person's sexual desire," and even if examining the above evidence, the defendant and the injured person merely caused another person's sexual desire or satisfaction with the victim's sexual desire to induce another person to feel sexual humiliation.

In light of the records of this case, a thorough examination of the judgment of the court below is justified, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. The judgment of the court below is just.