The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the criminal facts No. 3 of the judgment of the court below, the defendant found the defendant guilty of this part of the criminal facts, although he did not contain his hand or cellular phone with the victim's bridge to take a photograph, the court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the order to attend sexual assault treatment programs for forty hours, the forfeiture of the order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. However, considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant committed the crime as stated in paragraph (3) of the facts constituting the crime in the lower judgment.

Recognized.

1) The victim and witness L made a statement from an investigative agency to the court of the court below that corresponds to the above criminal facts, and the statements are relatively consistent and concrete.

In addition, not only did they have any original relationship with the Defendant, but also did not know the Defendant before the crime of this case was committed, and there was no motive or purpose to make a false statement unfavorable to the Defendant.

In light of this, their statements are reliable.

2) Furthermore, the victim and witness immediately reported to the police on the day on which the instant crime occurred, and received an investigation at the police station (at around 11:50 on March 12, 2015, the time when the police station arrived at the police station). The victim stated that he/she was not aware of the offender’s personal injury, even though he/she specifically stated the time of the crime, as stated in the foregoing criminal facts, and on the offender’s personal injury.

According to CCTV images, it is confirmed that the head of the defendant, who is going to the same visual emergency stairs from the victim's behind the victim's order, and the defendant also went to the second floor from the J building to the second floor from the same view.