A. The Defendant, as stated in the instant facts charged, did not force the victim to commit an indecent act or assault.

Nevertheless, the court below sentenced the defendant guilty, and there is an error of misunderstanding the fact and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Of the sentencing division, the sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of the suspended sentence of October, the observation of protection, 40 hours of the lecture order for sexual assault treatment, 160 hours of the community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant alleged to the effect that the above facts were alleged to be erroneous in the lower court, but the lower court rejected the Defendant’s above assertion and sufficiently recognized the facts charged in the instant case by reliance on the statements of the victim and witness F.

The judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, so the defendant's assertion of mistake of the above facts cannot be accepted.

3. The lower court appears to have sentenced the Defendant to the punishment by taking into account the favorable and unfavorable circumstances of the Defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the motive, circumstance, and consequence of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and the record of punishment, and the statutory punishment, the lower court’s judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

There is no special circumstance that it is deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is, nor there is no such special circumstance.

Therefore, the two kinds of punishment of the defendant cannot be accepted.

4. 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.