Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the Defendant guilty is erroneous due to the error of fact.

2. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, the victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, went to the victim's toilet, after the victim turned to the toilet, and went to the time of the victim's bucking.

In full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant has consistently stated the instant facts of assault; (b) four persons, including G, etc., committed the instant crime together with the Defendant at the time; (c) G, etc., a witness, submitted a written statement to the investigative agency that the Defendant had taken the custody of the victim; and (d) G did not answer the contents unfavorable to the Defendant by attending the court of the lower court as a witness; and (c) the Defendant exceeded the victim’s awareness as stated in the instant facts charged, and sufficiently recognized the facts of assaulting the victim at the time of her buck with the victim.

Therefore, the court below did not err by misapprehending the facts, and thus rejected the defendant's assertion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.