1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years;

3.However, for a period of five years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal principles [Violation of the Special Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act by Indecent Act)] recognize the fact that the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim G who was diving by entering the entrance through the open door of “abstinence for transfer education” (hereinafter “abstinence”). However, the term “an act of entering the view of abstinence through a heating room” cannot be deemed as falling under a residential intrusion under Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes in the following sense:

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

1) Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes provides that a person who commits a crime under Article 319(1) of the Criminal Act shall be punished by imprisonment for life or for at least five years in the event he/she commits a crime, such as rape, similar rape, indecent act by force, quasi-indecent act by force, etc. As such, the entry into a residence ought to be strictly construed and applied. 2) Since the inter-gradation is in a broad floor and is in a structure that is freely and freely accessible, there is no difference between the entire building and a single space that is used with a thickness.

Since the Defendant entered the above structure comparison through a rupture, it cannot be said that the Defendant intruded upon another person’s residence.

3) The Defendant’s act of entering a early guard cannot be deemed as having infringed upon the peace of residence by itself, and only an indecent act thereafter led to an infringement or disturbance of the peace of residence. Therefore, the causal relationship between the Defendant’s act of entering a early guard and the actual infringement of the peace of residence cannot be acknowledged. (b) Punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (the four-year imprisonment is too unreasonable).

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal for ex officio determination.