The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Although the defendant did not have committed an indecent act by force against the victim, the court below erred by misunderstanding the fact that the court below found the defendant guilty.

2. The following circumstances revealed based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court and the trial court: (i) although the victim was from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, there are differences in detailed parts; (ii) it is relatively consistent to the fact that the victim made a statement that he or she was aware of the victim’s chest and fry; (iii) it is difficult to find out any particular circumstance that the victim might find out; (iv) the victim’s statement was natural and special contradictory; and (iii) the Defendant denied the criminal facts at the time of the police investigation and did not have one end of the victim’s loss.

Comprehensively taking account of the fact that the Defendant’s DNA was discovered on the part of the victim’s statement, and the fact that the Defendant called “the police station with good faith only once” to the police officers dispatched to the scene of the instant case, the Defendant’s indecent act by force against the victim, such as the facts charged, can be acknowledged under the influence of alcohol.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.