The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Determination on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts

A. Although the alleged defendant was found to have committed an indecent act twice against the victim C, the lower court found the victim not guilty of this part of the facts charged.

B. In a case where there is no new objective reason to affect the formation of a documentary evidence in the appellate trial’s trial process, and there is no reasonable ground to believe that the first instance court’s determination was clearly erroneous or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts is considerably unfair due to violating logical and empirical rules, etc., the judgment on the acknowledgement of facts in the first instance judgment shall not be reversed without permission (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do18031, Mar. 22, 2017). There is no reasonable ground to deem that the determination of the acquittal portion as stated by the lower court was clearly erroneous or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts was significantly unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules.

B. There is no objective reason to affect the formation of a documentary evidence in the process of the court's hearing.

The lower court was justifiable to have acquitted this part of the facts charged.

The prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

2. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment on the prosecutor’s unfair assertion of sentencing, and the lower court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). This court did not submit new materials for sentencing, and there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court.

In addition, in full view of the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments, such as the fact that one victim calls for the defendant, does not want the punishment of the defendant, and that the defendant appears to have committed an contingent crime for the purpose of raising victims.