A. At the time of the instant assertion of mistake of facts, it is consistent with the fact that the Defendant, as alleged in the facts charged, followed the victim’s growth. However, there is no fact that the Defendant followed the victim’s growth, as in the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentence (six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) on the ground of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts: ① The victim first raised an objection to the issue of drying rice relocation within the E community hall from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and went out of the above community hall due to the kind of villagers; ② the process of the assault, the circumstance of the assault, and the situation at the time of the assault, ② The victim made a statement consistent with the victim’s above detailed statement at the time of assault, ② The victim was unable to be deemed to have made a false and unfavorable statement to the defendant because he was in a relationship with the victim five degree of confection, and ③ the court of the court of the court below did not make a witness at the time of the victim’s statement to the effect that the defendant was not in a specific situation at the time of the assault and the victim’s statement to the effect that there was no possibility that the victim could not have taken a witness at the time of the instant case, although he did not directly respond to the victim’s statement to the effect that he was not in the victim’s statement.