The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the event of the instant case, the victim was able to avoid the situation according to his intention with clear awareness at the time of the instant case by misapprehending the legal principles, and the victim was able to do so immediately next to the instant case, and thus, he did not have any mental or physical loss or resistance impossibility.

Nevertheless, the court below acknowledged the victim's crime of indecent act by recognizing the victim's mental and physical loss or impossibility of resistance. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment and forty hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) against an unfair defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the record of the instant case’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the victim, at the first police investigation on March 22, 2017, included the Defendant’s panty, by inserting his hand in a panty, thereby making the Defendant’s conspiracy up his hand.

It is recognized that the statement to the effect that “” was stated (Evidence 23 pages). However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the victim prepared on March 15, 2017 before the initial police investigation and submitted it to the investigation agency by mail, and the complaint received on March 20, 2017, “In the event the Defendant her panty was broken off, the Defendant her panty was faced with the physical part of the complainant’s body.”

“(Evidence No. 4 pages of evidence), the victim stated to the same effect in the prosecutor’s office and the court of original instance, and the victim stated to the same effect. ② The victim tried to gather the defendant’s drafting, which was the day following the instant case.

The victim made a statement. The victim seems to have not been able to fully shouldered in the lock at the time of the prosecution, and the third place of drinking at the time led to the third place of drinking, and the victim will take the place of drinking from first to third place of drinking.