The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) lies in an indecent act committed by the defendant against whom the victim's chest was taken or the defendant's above act was committed.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged of the instant case.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal prior to the judgment ex officio.

A prosecutor filed an application for amendment to a bill of amendment with regard to the facts charged in the instant case, which changed “the person who takes charge of the chest once” to “the person who takes charge of the chest once” and this Court changed to the subject of the adjudication upon permission. As such, the lower judgment was no longer maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

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

A. On September 15, 2018, around 12:42, 2018, the Defendant found that the victim C (nick, 26 years of age) around the front crosswalk B in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City had a male-gu and humbly divided talks, and forced the victim to commit an indecent act, such as inserting his hand in one way between two persons, and making the chest of the victim talk.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court committed an indecent act that causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and infringes on the victim’s sexual moral sense, even though the Defendant’s grandchildren could feel obsessure due to the fact that the Defendant’s grandchildren contacted the victim’s chests, and constitutes an indecent act that objectively causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public.

It is insufficient to recognize that there is an intention to commit an indecent act or an indecent act, and there is no other evidence.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

(1) In front of the crosswalk, the Defendant observed the figures in which the male-friendly Gu of the victim and the victim talked with two arms.