The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.

The sentence against the accused shall be 500,000 won.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. misunderstanding of facts as to the gist of the grounds of appeal (based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the fact that the defendant exercised the force of force as to the facts charged in this case and by force of indecent act by force is recognized).

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor's ex officio, the prosecutor of the first instance trial, while maintaining the facts charged by the prosecutor not guilty as the primary facts charged, and applying for changes in indictment with regard to the name of the conjunctive crime together with the ancillary facts charged as follows, and with regard to the preliminary applicable provisions, this court approved the application for changes in indictment to add "Article 260 (1) of the Criminal Act" to the name of the conjunctive crime, and thus, the judgment of the first instance court cannot be maintained any longer due to such subsequent changes in circumstances.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the argument of mistake of facts about the primary facts charged by the prosecutor is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

B. In full view of various circumstances as indicated in the reasoning that are acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the first instance court rendered a judgment not guilty of the primary facts charged on the ground that it is difficult to believe that part of the victimD’s statements supporting the main facts charged of the instant case’s indecent act by compulsion, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this point. In light of the records, such measures of the first instance court are just and acceptable, and there is no illegality of misunderstanding of facts affecting the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, the prosecutor’s above assertion disputing this point is not acceptable.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of first instance is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following is followed after pleading, as the above reasons for ex officio reversal are established.