A. In fact, the Defendant did not have any misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, and the Defendant did not have any losses and buckbucks inside, and even if so, the Defendant committed such act.

Even if this does not constitute a forced indecent act under the Criminal Code, it does not constitute an indecent act against the defendant.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (2 million won in punishment, and 40 hours in order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the lower court also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal.

As stated in the reasoning of the judgment, the court below rejected the defendant's assertion and sentenced the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case.

2) Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, it is reasonable to fully recognize the Defendant’s intentional indecent act by force against the victim as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, and it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant’s act constitutes an indecent act by force under the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are without merit.

A) The victim, as described in the facts charged in the instant case from the investigative agency to the trial court, has made a relatively specific and consistent statement on the background and process of forced indecent act, and the content and method of the prosecution (the 27 and 28th page of the evidence record, and the 53th page of the trial record). However, in the police investigation, the victim made a statement that the victim was involved in the victim’s hand and buckbucks with the victim’s hand, but in the prosecutor’s investigation and court, the victim made a change to the victim’s statement by having the Defendant left hand (the 61 and 62th page of the trial record).