A. Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts: Although the Defendant stated the victim’s speech on the alleyway at the time of the instant case, the Defendant did not commit an indecent act by force against the victim.

B. Improper sentencing by the prosecutor: The sentence of the lower court (two years of suspended sentence for one year, etc.) is too unhutiled and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant and the defense counsel asserted the same purport in the lower court, and in light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court determined that the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim, such as the facts charged, was acknowledged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in comparison with the record, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error by misconception of facts which affected the judgment.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. As to the prosecutor’s improper assertion of sentencing, the sentencing of the relevant legal doctrine is too heavy or too minor in light of the content of the specific case.

Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment, and the sentencing of the original court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate court is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the original judgment.

On the other hand, the sentencing judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable limit of its discretion when comprehensively taking into account the conditions of sentencing as shown in the court below’s sentencing review process and the sentencing guidelines.

In a case where the appellate court’s judgment is deemed unfair in light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing review, the appellate court should reverse the judgment below’s unreasonable determination of the sentence (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). 2) The appellate court’s sentence return to the instant case is the specific case.