The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and eight months.

A sexual assault against the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to Defendant 1’s confinement of the victim E from among the facts charged of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant recommended the victim E, who drank together outside a restaurant, to unfold the damaged part caused by the dispute between the defendant and the victim E, and there is only a kind of detention to prevent the victim E from driving under the influence of alcohol, and there is no fact that the victim E was detained. Even though the Defendant’s act of detention as above constitutes the crime of confinement under Article 276(1) of the Criminal Act, it is to prevent the victim’s drunk driving, which constitutes a justifiable act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act. Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant of the above confinement. It is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to a justifiable act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the sentencing of unfair sentencing (4 years of imprisonment, 80 hours of sexual assault treatment program, 80 hours order of restriction on employment for five years).

B. A prosecutor 1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the 112 Report Processing Manual and the statement of the victim E, as to the obstruction of business among the facts charged in the instant case of mistake of facts, the Defendant may be found to have interfered with his duties by bringing the disturbance to the large interest at the main point operated by the victim E on December 26, 2017. Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a judgment not guilty on the ground that there is a lack of evidence to recognize the facts charged, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The offense of confinement on the part of the victim E is not possible for a person to move into a specific area because the freedom of action of the person is the protected legal interest.