Even though the Defendant could in the process of taking a victim’s bath, he did not intentionally look back on the part of the victim.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

At the time of the police video recording investigation, the victim made a clear statement to the effect that “I am blick by inserting the fingers in a brush,” and the Defendant also led to a confession of this part of the facts charged at the time of the prosecutor’s investigation.

In light of the victim’s statement and the Defendant’s prosecutor’s statement, etc., the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the charges of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the act of sexual intercourse with a minor under the age of 13).

The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

It is unfair that the court below's improper exemption from disclosure or notification order is unfair to exempt the defendant from disclosure or notification order.

Judgment

The purpose of Article 254(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which requires the establishment of specific elements in the facts charged, is to facilitate the exercise of the right of defense by specifying the scope of defense of the accused. Thus, the facts charged is sufficient to include the specific elements in the facts charged to the extent that it is possible to distinguish the specific facts that meet the requirements for the composition of the crime from other facts, and the "date of a crime" as referred to in the above provision, should be stated to the extent that it does not conflict with double prosecution or prescription.