The judgment of the court below (including the part not guilty in the grounds) shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Act by deceptive means, etc.) and convicted of only the crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Act by deceptive means, etc.), despite the fact that the defendant's act of deceiving or kneeing the victim's body itself constitutes an indecent act.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too uneasible and unfair.

C. It is unreasonable for the lower court to have exempted the Defendant from disclosure and notification orders.

2. Determination

A. The crime of indecent act by mistake and misapprehension of legal principles is established when an indecent act is committed after the other party makes it difficult to resist by means of assault or intimidation against the other party. Whether such assault or intimidation was likely to make it difficult to resist the other party’s resistance should be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, such as the content and degree of assault and intimidation, the circumstances leading up to the exercise of force, the relationship with the victim, and the circumstances at the time of the indecent act and the latter.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Do5979 Decided January 25, 2007). In addition, an indecent act by compulsion includes not only cases where an indecent act is committed after the other party made it difficult to resist by means of assault or intimidation but also cases where an indecent act itself is deemed an indecent act. In such a case, an indecent act does not necessarily require that the other party’s intention is at a level to suppress, and as long as the other party’s exercise of force against the other party’s will, regardless of its power, it does not require that the assault is against the other party’s will.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2417, Apr. 26, 2002). Examining the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and adopted by the lower court in light of the following circumstances: