A. The Defendant did not force the victim to commit an indecent act or injure the victim as stated in the facts charged of this case.

B. Total guilty

Even if the court below's punishment (two years of suspended sentence in October, 40 hours of lecture for sexual assault treatment, 200 hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendant forced the victim to commit an indecent act and inflicted bodily injury on the victim as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the lower judgment is sufficiently recognized.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

1) The statements from the victim’s investigative agency to the court below’s court are reliable as they are specific and consistent to the extent that it is difficult to make statements without actual experience.

The facts of the victim's damage are sufficiently supported by F's statements and cases, which were witnesses, and by the victim's photo taken by the police station after 7-8 hours from the time of the occurrence of the incident, such as bucks, bucks, and knish panty photographs (58 pages of the investigation records).

2) The Defendant’s defense counsel asserts that there is a difference between the victim and F’s statement regarding the crime of injury. However, the statement between the victim and F was made by the Defendant by the Defendant’s fault when the victim’s left booms the victim’s hand, and the main part of the part that the victim was on the part of the victim who was on the part of the victim who was above the floor and was about the victim

However, F’s statement does not contain a statement that the Defendant plucked, plucked, and plucked up the victim’s left hand, and made twice the victim’s, etc., and it is somewhat less specific than the victim’s statement that the witness F’s statement was directly damaged than the victim’s statement, and thus, it does not particularly suspect the credibility thereof.

3) The defendant-appellant.