A. The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim, and there was no intention to commit an indecent act.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of five million won, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts were duly adopted and examined: (i) the Defendant was led to confession at the lower court; (ii) the victim prepared after the agreement with the Defendant and stated to the effect that “it is not an indecent act by the Defendant”; (iii) the victim again stated in the police that “it is limited to signing and signing an application for punishment with the Defendant; and (iv) the Defendant was frightening the chest.” In telephone conversations with the police, Edo, which was the victim’s day, the victim’s day-to-day behavior, considered the victim’s ability to directly witness the criminal scene, and followed the victim’s “pathy” to the Defendant; and (v) it appears that the victim was aware that the victim was in a state of frightening, i.e., “the victim was in a state of frighting,” and that the victim was in a state of frightening, i.e., sexual intercourse with the Defendant.

The judgment of the court below is just and it is alleged by the defendant.