강제추행
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles) of the Defendant’s defense counsel appears to have disputed the illegality of sentencing on the date of the second trial of the trial of the first instance court. However, the Defendant’s defense counsel did not find any assertion regarding sentencing on the grounds of appeal submitted by the Defendant’s defense counsel, and only stated that the Defendant’s ground for appeal was misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles at the trial date of the first trial of the first instance trial of the first instance. Thus, it does not determine
The Defendant, like the facts charged, did not have any her her butt her mar and her butt.
Even if the defendant's grandchildren contact the victim's body, since the defendant had contacted the victim with the victim while leaving the space on the floor, this cannot be said to be an indecent act against the victim.
2. The Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion and found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in full view of the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning.
In addition to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below's decision, the court below's finding the defendant guilty of the facts charged is justified.
The Defendant’s factual misunderstanding and misunderstanding of legal principles are difficult to accept.
(1) The victim was consistently sleeped by an investigative agency to the court of the lower court, and was sleeped by her son while he/she was passing by the Defendant’s side, and her her son’s son’s son.
After that, the victim was followed by the victim.
E, the defendant asked whether there is a fact that the defendant met the victim, so that he can do so.
In response, “The fact was delivered to other employees and reported to the police,” and specifically stated the situation at the time of the damage and the details of the report at the time of the damage (the trial record 62 pages, 9, 22 pages). ② With respect to the instant case, E, a worker of the victim, is the victim.