A. The fact that the Defendant, by mistake of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles, was leading to the victim’s side in order to re-consipate the victim at the time and place indicated in the facts charged, is illegal, but the lower court, although there was no indecent act against the victim, found the victim’s credibility

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted that the Defendant had the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court recognized the credibility of the victim’s statement in an investigative agency, and rejected the Defendant’s assertion. The lower court determined that the Defendant continued to recognize the fact that the Defendant was spanty by putting the victim’s ties and panty by inserting the victim’s ties and panty, as indicated in the facts charged in the instant case, in spite of the victim’s refusal to do so.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in comparison with the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below including the victim's legal statement at the court below, the judgment is deemed legitimate.

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

B. The crime of this case on the assertion of unfair sentencing is likely to hinder the formation of a sound sexual consciousness of a young victim who is growing in Korea due to mental shock and suffering in this case, and is also a big obstacle to the growth of a healthy and normal social person, in addition to the fact that the defendant, as the father's father's father's mother's mother's father with intellectual disability 11 years old female as the father's mother's mother with the same room, and the victim, who was broken out in diving, expressed his intention to refuse to refuse to do so, and the nature of the crime is very poor.