The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment imposed by the lower court (two months of imprisonment, two years of probation, two years of community service, 200 hours of sexual assault treatment, 40 hours of sexual assault treatment, confiscation, and three years of employment restriction order) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) Error of facts (not guilty part) found the Defendant guilty of the primary charged facts on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to support the fact that the Defendant taken the victim by using a mobile phone, but the lower court did not have any photographed evidence, and thus, found the Defendant not guilty of the primary charged facts. The lower court erred by misapprehending the above facts. 2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (one month of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of community service, 200 hours of sexual assault treatment, 40 hours of sexual assault treatment, confiscation, and 3 years of employment restriction order) is too unreasonable

2. Determination

A. On May 14, 2018, the gist of this part of the facts charged by the prosecutor's argument of mistake is as follows: (i) around 20:08 on May 14, 2018, the defendant puts a cell phone under the part of the victim's body, which might cause sexual humiliation or sexual impairment, using the cell phone function of the victim's body located in the front of the defendant, using the cell phone function at Esplate 2, Esplate around 2, 2018; and (ii) considering the CCTV image taken at the time, it is confirmed that the defendant puts a cell phone under the part of the victim's body located in the front of Esplate; and (iii) the defendant's cell phone screen was turned on at the time. In light of the above facts, there is doubt that the defendant is not taking the part of the victim's body.

However, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the facts charged in the criminal trial, and the conviction has the probative value that makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.