A. Fact-misunderstanding is true that the Defendant misunderstanding of the fact that he was aware of the victim’s son and face in the subsequent place is near the back and back of the victim’s ear.

However, among the facts charged of this case, the part that "the defendant prevented the victim from resisting" by drawing the victim behind, and the part that "the defendant, as soon as possible, carried the victim's right ear well as the right ear of the victim." is not the part that "the defendant carried the victim's right ear well."

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case including the above contents is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the community service order 80 hours, and the sexual assault treatment program 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim as shown in the facts charged of this case (from the defendant India investigative agency to the court below, the whole facts charged of this case was acknowledged). Therefore, it is reasonable that the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, and there is an error of law by misconception of facts

subsection (b) of this section.

This part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. Although the defendant asserts some of his errors in sentencing when he was in the first instance, the defendant is recognized as a substitute for his wrong act, the defendant is the first offender who has no record of criminal punishment, the defendant's agreement with the victim that the injured person does not want the punishment of the defendant, etc. However, the crime of this case is deemed to have committed an indecent act against the victim by the psychological counseling defendant in light of the relationship between the defendant and the victim, the method of the crime, etc., and the experience of sexual indecent act damage in the past during counseling.