The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of five million won, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for ex officio judgment.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of the instant case and sentenced the Defendant to a fine of KRW 5 million.

However, the statutory penalty stipulated in Article 11 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes is "a imprisonment with prison labor for not more than one year or a fine not exceeding three million won." Thus, in this case where there is no reason to increase punishment, a fine exceeding three million won cannot be sentenced.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by rendering a sentence exceeding the scope of applicable sentences in law.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined by changing the above provisions.

3. In a criminal trial proceeding for determining the credibility of a statement after the first instance court proceeded with the witness examination procedure in a criminal trial proceeding for a mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, not only is it consistent with the rationality, logic, morality, or empirical rule of the content of the statement itself, but also is consistent with the witness evidence or a third party’s statement, such as the appearance or attitude of a witness who is involved in the statement in an open court after being sworn before a judge, and the appearance or attitude of a witness, and the penance of the statement, etc., which are difficult to record, the credibility of the statement should be assessed by directly observing various circumstances that are difficult to record.

On the other hand, the appellate court's judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court under the current Criminal Procedure Act is based on the records including the witness examination protocol, so it is most important factor in determining the credibility of the statement.