2. The defendant is innocent. 3. The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A. The Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) found the Defendant guilty of the above facts charged on the ground of the victim’s statement without credibility, etc., although the Defendant did not have committed any indecent act by force by inserting the victim’s fingers in the sound book as stated in the instant facts charged, the lower court found the Defendant guilty. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s imprisonment with prison labor (four years of imprisonment) is too uncomfortable and unfair. 2) Even though the Defendant’s risk of recommitting a sexual crime, the lower court’s dismissal of the Defendant’s request for an attachment order against the Defendant is unlawful.

2. Determination

A. On the part of the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the summary of the facts charged in this case is that the Defendant, as the relative father of the victim C (man, 3 years of age), had the Defendant’s wife arrived at the Defendant’s home to commit an indecent act by using the Defendant’s her body at the home. On the other hand, the Defendant left the victim’s room at the time of winter-si D and the Defendant’s home at the time of winter-si, and left the victim’s lower and pantyty, and refused to do so, despite the Defendant’s refusal, the Defendant’s refusal to do so means the Defendant’s strongly called “welve” and “welve” means that “I will go off,” and “I am on the part of the victim’s sound, so that I am son’s finger and son were forced to take the Defendant’s finger and son at the same time on three occasions, and committed an indecent act by force. Accordingly, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim’s her son’s 13 times more than three times.