All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s punishment (one million won of fine) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the statements made by the victim of mistake of facts and witness E, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts, even though the Defendant acknowledged the victim's second instance by drinking the victim's second instance. 2) The judgment of the court below against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding of facts, in addition to the circumstances stated in detail by the court below, and considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below.

The prosecutor's assertion of mistake is not accepted.

The defendant is arrested as a flagrant offender immediately after the occurrence of this case and received an investigation from the police. The defendant consistently asserts that there is no fact that the victim's abundance was frightened, but there is no fact that the victim's abundance was frightened.

In addition, E, a witness of the instant case and the police assigned for special guard at one branch of the D Association, made a clear statement in the original court that “No one is the victim’s two grandchildren to contact the victim’s back-to-face or drinking prices.” This seems to be consistent with the Defendant’s assertion that it was consistent with the victim’s back-to-date.

Furthermore, the victim argued from the defendant that the victim was using the back-to-date body, but the above witness stated that the victim did not have any written statement.

In light of the clear statement of the above witness in a relatively objective position, the victim’s statement alone is insufficient to recognize this part of the facts charged.

The Defendant’s statement of grounds for appeal submitted on August 3, 2020 through the “statement of grounds for appeal.”