The judgment below

Examining the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, the lower court’s conviction of indecent act among the facts charged in this case is justifiable, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of indecent act by compulsion, by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence or by misapprehending the legal doctrine

In addition, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the defendant’s punishment is unreasonable cannot

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.