The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts, the fact that the defendant committed indecent act by compulsion against the victim D, such as the written facts charged.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one million won of a fine) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged on the ground that “A and D’s statements alone are not sufficient to recognize, as stated in the facts charged, the fact that the Defendant committed an indecent act by force on the chest side of D’s head and face without reasonable doubt, and there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise,” on the basis of the detailed circumstances indicated in the item “2. Judgment on the acquittal part of the said judgment”.

In a thorough examination of the above judgment of the court below in light of the records of this case, the judgment of the court below is just and there is no error of mistake of facts as pointed out by the prosecutor.

Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the defendant's failure to agree with the victim and that he/she has a record of criminal punishment several times, including the suspended sentence for a crime on a double-class basis.

However, it is also recognized that the Defendant recognized a mistake and reflects the offense of insult, that there is no previous conviction of the same kind, and that the degree of insult of this case is relatively excessive.

In addition, in full view of the following circumstances: Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing of the lower court after the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible.