In particular, in relation to the 1-A-2-2-2-2-2-2-1-2-2-2-2-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-2-3-3-3-3-3-4-3-4-4-4

In addition, Article 1-b of the facts charged, the defendant did not have committed an indecent act against the F in the situation where other employees are accompanied by the vehicle at the time, and the defendant stated in an investigative agency that "Specific is not memory, but he has been seated on the back seat and the victim has been seated on the front seat (Evidence Records 118-119)" (Evidence Records 118-19). On the contrary, the court below asserts to the effect that "the defendant was seated on the back seat of the front seat and the back seat of the driver's seat" (the counsel's opinion of the court of first instance, the trial record 23 pages), and "the victim was seated on the back seat of the front seat of the driver's seat and the rear seat of the M and the chief of the protocol" (the summary of the oral argument of January 21, 202).

No indecent act was committed against the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found all of the facts charged in this case guilty on different premise is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle which affected the conclusion.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The lower court also asserted that the Defendant was not guilty, and the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the grounds that, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the fact that the victims committed indecent act, such as the entries in each of the instant facts charged, as indicated in the instant facts charged.

1. The victims are victims of each crime committed by the defendant from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, the appraisal of victims and the defendant.