The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not look at the victims’ chests.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, which erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the legal principles, even if there was a physical contact with the victims, there was no assault or intimidation in indecent act by compulsion.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable (the imprisonment for eight months, the suspension of execution two years, the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours, the community service order 160 hours, the employment restriction order three years).

2. Determination

A. Although the probative value of evidence 1 related to the assertion of mistake of facts is left to the discretion of a judge, such judgment shall conform to logical and empirical rules, and the degree of the formation of a conviction to be found guilty in a criminal trial shall not be required to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. However, it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and the rejection of evidence recognized as probative value is not allowed beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. The term “reasonable suspicion” in this context refers to not all questions and correspondence, but to the reasonable doubt of the probability of a fact inconsistent with the facts that is not compatible with the facts that are alleged in accordance with logical and empirical rules. Thus, it is necessary to establish the basis for the sexual reasoning theory that is grasped in relation to the fact-finding that is favorable to the defendant. Thus, any doubt based on conceptual or abstract possibility cannot be said to be included in a reasonable doubt.

Therefore, it is therefore.