The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and improper sentencing)

A. Fact-misunderstanding and legal principles - misunderstanding, attempted threat, and forced indecent conduct do not constitute intimidation and indecent conduct by force.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the sole basis of the statements made by the victim D without credibility (hereinafter “victim”).

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of judgment.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, on the ground that the Defendant had already been sentenced to a fine due to the same criminal facts, in relation to the obstruction of one’s own business on August 21, 2017, and as of August 21, 2017, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

(c)

The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, and 80 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) against the illegal accused in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles - The most important evidence that conforms to each of the facts charged is the victim's statement, and the issue of this part is the credibility of the victim's statement.

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the victim’s statement that corresponds to the facts charged is reliable, and the defendant’s use card was cancelled by threatening the victim, thereby obtaining property benefits, and the victim’s indecent act is sufficiently recognized in the course of the attempted withdrawal of the taxi cost of KRW 100,000.

Therefore, the court below is just in finding a guilty of all the facts charged, and there is no violation of law as alleged by the defendant.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

(i)..