A. Fact-finding is that the Defendant: (a) caused the Defendant to be aware of the victim’s inner part of the victim at one time and twice the upper part of the victim’s inner part; and (b) supported the victim at one time due to the rear her inner part; (c) however, there is no fact that the Defendant took part in several times, such as the victim’s shoulder and chest, as indicated in the facts charged.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal, and as to this, the lower court rejected the above assertion and found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged, while explaining the lower court’s judgment on the lower court’s summary

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant has sufficiently recognized the fact that the defendant inflicted an injury by assaulting the victim as stated in the facts charged, so the judgment of the court below is justified and there is no error of law

1) We consistently held that D, a witness, committed several assaults from the day immediately after the instant case to the court of the court below, such as consistently making 10 victims at the time of the Defendant’s occurrence, especially taking the face, taking the breast part, etc. even after the victim was taken.

was stated.

2) The victim thought at the investigative agency and the court of the court below that he/she would be aware that he/she would be killed in a large number of memorys following the head of his/her birth.

was stated.

3) According to the medical certificate prepared by the doctor of the Chungcheongnam-nam University Hospital, the victimized person suffered injury, such as blood transfusion, strelle, strelle, and strekee of internal and internal walls, due to credit.

4) D cannot find any motive to make a false statement against the Defendant, and D and the statements made by the victim are inconsistent with objective evidence, such as the victim’s injury injury and the degree of injury.

Therefore, D and the victim's statements are made.