A. The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case in the absence of a mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles that there was an assault or intimidation against the victim by assault or intimidation. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (the fine of three million won and the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is based on the relevant legal principles, but such determination should conform to logical and empirical rules, and the degree of the formation of a conviction to be found guilty in a criminal trial should be such that there is no reasonable doubt, but to the extent that it is not necessary to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection by causing a suspicion that has no reasonable grounds to recognize probative value is beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

The victim’s statement is consistent with the main contents of the statement, and there is no unreasonable or contradictory part in light of the empirical rule, and the defendant’s motive or reason to make a false statement is not clearly revealed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2018Do7709, Oct. 25, 2018). Furthermore, the crime of indecent act by compulsion includes not only the other party’s indecent act but also the case where the act of assault itself is acknowledged as an indecent act after the other party makes it difficult to resist by resorting to assault or intimidation. In this case, the assault does not necessarily require that the other party’s intent is at least to suppress.