A. The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim.

B. The Defendant was in a state of mental disorder under the influence of alcohol.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment and 80 hours of order to complete sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, including the victim’s statement on the assertion of mistake of facts, the fact that the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim as stated in the judgment below is recognized.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

B. Article 20 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (excluding a crime under Article 2 (1) 1) may be exempted from the application of Article 10 (1) and (2) and Article 11 of the Criminal Act when a sexual crime (excluding a crime under Article 2 (1) 1) is committed in a state of mental disorder caused by drinking or drug. Thus, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the crime of this case, which is a sexual crime under Article 2 (1) 3 of the same Act, since it excluded the application of mental disorder under

The defendant's mental disorder is without merit.

C. It is favorable for the Defendant to have no previous decision on the argument of unfair sentencing.

However, in light of the contents and circumstances of the instant crime, the nature of the crime is inferior, the damage recovery is not expected, the Defendant denies the instant crime, etc., and the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime as stated in the first head of the judgment below, and all of the sentencing conditions in the records, including the means and methods of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the instant crime, are considered as inappropriate.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. Conclusion.