All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

, however, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The body of the victims taken by the defendant of misapprehension of the legal principle (as to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes in the judgment of the court below of the second instance) does not fall under the body of another person that may cause sexual m

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the different premise is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Each sentence of the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for 10 months; imprisonment for 8 months; and suspension of execution for 2 years; probation; community service order; and order to attend sexual assault treatment lectures) is too unreasonable.

The defendant and his defense counsel explicitly withdrawn the misconception of facts against the judgment of the court of first instance on the date of the first instance trial.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant's ex officio, the judgment of the court below against the defendant was rendered separately, and each appeal was filed, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings of each of the above appeal cases. Each of the offenses of the court below is a concurrent offense relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence is to be imposed pursuant to Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the judgment of the court below against the defendant cannot

However, despite the existence of the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. Judgment on misapprehension of legal principles

A. The Defendant alleged in the lower judgment that he was not guilty as in the grounds of appeal on this part, and the lower court objectively held that the part taken by carmeras, etc. constitutes “the body of another person, which may cause sexual humiliation or shame” under Article 14(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.