A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

For the defendant 80 hours.

A. Regarding the fact that an indecent act against the victim G (a false person) was committed by a prosecutor, the victim consistently stated the fact of damage, and the Defendant also made a specific statement at an investigative agency that the victim's chest was delivered. As such, the Defendant’s indecent act by force is acknowledged.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (a 8 months of imprisonment, 80 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program, and 1 cellular phone when confiscated Samsung Gallon ju) is too unfaled and unreasonable.

B. The Defendant withdrawn his claim for mental and physical weakness on the first trial date, and stated to the effect that the sentencing would be considered.

The sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on each of the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor, prior to the judgment on ex officio, the prosecutor committed an indecent act by force against the victim G who was found innocent at the lower court on the grounds of the judgment of the lower court (Article 2 of the facts charged). The criminal facts of the crime are as follows: “The Defendant, at around April 16, 2018, committed an indecent act by force against the victim by means of deceiving the victim’s chest who was deprived of mind from the Defendant’s office on the grounds of indeption in Article 1 of the facts charged.”

As stated in the judgment below, the above part of the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained as it stated in the above. (On the other hand, as long as the court found the defendant guilty of this part of the modified facts charged, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake on the facts charged before the modification shall not be judged separately.) In this case, the part of the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant should be reversed on the ground of ex officio reversal as stated in the above, and the part of the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty and the part of the judgment of the court below guilty shall be concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.