Defendant

All appeals filed by A and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of sentencing, and violation of the Juvenile Protection Act) was false (related to each forced indecent act and violation of the Juvenile Protection Act). The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the Victim F, was unaware of the age of juvenile F, and did not confirm that F was to be employed as an employee.

2) The sentence of the lower court against an unfair defendant in sentencing (the imprisonment of eight months, two years of probation, one hundred and twenty hours of community service, and forty hours of sexual assault treatment lectures) is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the facts of the prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts and sentencing) 1, misunderstanding [the fact that Defendant A violated the Music Industry Promotion Act against Defendant A (2016 senior order 5046) and the violation of the Music Industry Promotion Act against Defendants (2016 senior order 5046) and the facts that Defendants violated the Music Industry Promotion Act (2015 senior order 6372 senior order 2015 senior order 6372)] I, J and M’s investigative agency, and the circumstances before and after each of the instant cases, it can be recognized that Defendant A arranged a loan in a singing practice, and the fact that Defendant A violated the Music Industry Promotion Act against Defendant A and Defendants should

2) The lower court’s sentence against the illegal Defendants in sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on Defendant A’s assertion of mistake of facts (related to each forced indecent act and violation of the Juvenile Protection Act) 1) The Defendant and the defense counsel in the lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal, and the lower court also stated that ① up to the time when the investigation agency and the lower court rendered a judgment, the Defendant and the defense counsel in the lower court stated that “A victim F was an employee of the singing practice hall with the knowledge that the victim was a high school student, employed the victim as an employee of the singing practice hall, and the Defendant committed an indecent act twice,” and there is no reason to conclude that the victim would have undermined the Defendant until the victim was punished for perjury, and the victim F’s statement was reliable in light of the victim F’s attitude of statement in the lower court. ② The victim F was the victim.