The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the victim’s statement of misunderstanding of facts, the first police statement, etc., the part of the facts charged in which the defendant inserted fingers in the part of the victim’s sound state where the defendant is unable to resist.

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged. The court below erred in misunderstanding of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (hereinafter “fine 3,000,000”) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. An ex officio determination prosecutor shall maintain the facts charged of the existing quasi-rape in the trial as the primary facts charged, and shall apply for changes in indictment by adding the same contents as the facts stated in paragraph (1) to the name of the crime, the applicable provisions of Articles 299 and 298 of the Criminal Act, and the following facts charged. The subject of the adjudication was changed by this court’s permission.

However, as examined below, this Court acquitted the charge of quasi-rape, which is the primary charge, and convicted the charge of quasi-rape, and thus, the part of the judgment of the court below which only is the primary charge cannot be maintained, and the part of the judgment of the court below which is the primary charge cannot be maintained. The crime of injury which the court below found guilty should be sentenced to one punishment in relation to the crime of quasi-indecent act committed in the trial and the crime of injury under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, there is still a ground for misunderstanding of facts about quasi-rape in the prosecutor's office, which is subject to the judgment of this court, and it will be examined.

3. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. On December 26, 2017, the summary of this part of the facts charged (mainly charged charges) is the residence of the Defendant F-friendly job offers of the Seo-gu building and the Victim D (V, 22 years old) in Gwangju-gu around 11:00.