The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Where there exist several orders for the judgment, such as partial conviction and partial acquittal of the case prosecuted for concurrent crimes within the scope of the judgment of this court, the part included in the one part may be appealed separately from other parts, and the part in which both parties have not appealed may become final and conclusive separately (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do10985, Nov. 25, 2010). The lower court dismissed public prosecution against the Defendant regarding intimidation and assault against the victim among the facts charged against the Defendant, and rendered a judgment of conviction against the remainder of the facts charged.

Since the defendant appealed only against the guilty portion, the defendant cannot appeal against the judgment dismissing the public prosecution (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do3076 delivered on December 13, 1983). The dismissed portion of the judgment of the court below becomes separate and conclusive as it is and excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing);

A. The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim as stated in the lower judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of six months and the completion of forty hours for a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. In a case where a witness’s statement, including the victim, is mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it shall not be rejected without permission, unless there exists any separate evidence to deem the credibility objectively and objectively acceptable (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court: (i) the victim stated to the effect that it conforms to each of the facts of this case specifically and consistently in the facts of this case; (ii) the victim stated to the effect that it conforms to the facts of the detention house and the facts of this case; and (iii) related to the crimes of paragraph (1) of the first instance judgment; and (v) the F stated to the effect that “the Defendant who was asked the victim after hearing the fact of damage from the damaged person,” and that “the Defendant was only