The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant committed an indecent act with the victim’s intent to commit an indecent act and committed an act to protect the victim, even though the victim was scamed or did so in order to have the victim communicate easily at the time and place specified in the facts charged in the instant case, and at the same time and place, in order to make the victim talk easily, at the time and place. It is also difficult to view the Defendant’s act as an indecent act under the law.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 3.5 million and an order to complete a program) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. “Judgment of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles” means an act that causes a sense of sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is objectively contrary to good sexual moral sense, and thus infringing on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether it constitutes such an act shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship before the offender and the victim, circumstances leading to the act, specific manner leading to the act, the surrounding objective situation, and the sexual moral sense of that time (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do52, Apr. 16, 2004). Moreover, it does not require a subjective motive or purpose to stimulate sexual humiliation as a subjective element necessary for the establishment of a crime of indecent act (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Do5856, Sept. 26, 2013).

1. The injured party stated in the facts charged of this case.