In addition, appeal by the person who requested probation order is dismissed.

A. There is no fact that the Defendant and the person requesting probation order (hereinafter “Defendant”) committed an act as described in the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part. Based on the circumstances stated in its reasoning, the lower court acknowledged the fact that the Defendant inducedd a victim for the purpose of indecent act as stated in the facts charged and committed an indecent act against the victim. Examining the judgment of the lower court closely after comparing the aforementioned judgment with the records, the lower court’s determination is justifiable, and there is no error of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the Defendant, and there is no error of law as alleged by the Defendant. Accordingly, this part of the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing cannot be accepted. 2) As to the Defendant’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing, the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant by inducing the

The defendant has a mental disorder in spite of the victim's specific and consistent statement.

It is trying to avoid liability because the crime is not memory.

As a result of the defendant's crime, the victim seems to have suffered severe sexual humiliation and mental impulse and suffering, and the victim was punished against the defendant.

Defendant has already been punished twice for the same crime.

In light of the above circumstances, even though considering the fact that the Defendant had committed the instant crime to a certain extent when the Defendant was in a trial, and that the Defendant was suffering from a high age, depression and heart disease, etc., it is inevitable to punish the Defendant corresponding to his liability.

3.2