A. The Defendant did not have committed an indecent act by using sparing the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of suspended execution in April and twenty-four hours of sexual assault treatment lectures) is unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged is around 22:00 on October 6, 2013, the Defendant: (a) drinked alcoholic beverages at the “H” restaurant operated by the Victim G (F) located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government; and (b) demanded the Victim’s left arms and singing together; (c) however, the Defendant: (a) carried them into the restaurant, and (d) prevented the Victim from resisting and resisting the Victim; (b) made the Victim’s own car into the restaurant, and (c) made the Victim’s own car into the restaurant, she forced the Victim to use the Victim’s two clothes and the vessel as his/her hand.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged based on the evidence of the lower court, such as the victim and witness I and J’s testimony, etc. In line with the records, the lower court’s judgment is justifiable and inconsistent with the records, and there was no error of misapprehending the

The Defendant’s statement of the witness N of the lower court, consistent with the Defendant’s defense, stated to the effect that N himself does not witness the situation at a governance place, and that it does not comply with all the situation. Moreover, in light of the fact that the Defendant and the victim’s agreement were obtained a final and conclusive judgment of conviction (Seoul Western District Court 2014MaMa2009) by false statements on the process of leading up to the agreement between the Defendant and the victim, it cannot be trusted, and the Defendant’s statement of the witness O of the lower court on the part of the Defendant was made that theO returned first before the time of the occurrence of the instant case and was on the spot,

3. The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is not against the defendant's denial of the crime, and there are other circumstances, such as the character and conduct of the defendant, the motive, means and consequence of the crime, the relationship with the victim, and the circumstances after the crime.