All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The Defendant (definite) did not commit an indecent act by using the victim’s left tock with her m or her m or her m or m or her m or m or m or her m or m or m or her m or m or her m or m or m

B. The prosecutor’s sentencing and warning (a fine of KRW 3 million and completion of a sexual assault treatment program)

A. There was no new objective reason that could affect the formation of a documentary evidence in the appellate court’s trial process of the appellate court’s determination of the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, and the determination of the value of evidence in the

In a case where there is no reasonable ground to deem that the argument leading to the fact-finding is remarkably unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules, etc., the determination on the fact-finding of the first instance court should not be reversed without permission (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do18031, Mar. 22, 2017). The Defendant also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal. The lower court also asserted in the lower court. The lower court determined that the victim’s statement as to the damage was very specific and consistent; the Defendant’s attitude within the previous vehicle; the Defendant’s attitude was visible at the time of the instant case; the Defendant’s appearance inside the previous vehicle at the time of his/her discharge; the situation inside the previous vehicle at the time of his/her discharge; and the Defendant’s intention to be inferred therefrom;

In addition, according to the evidence duly adopted by the court below and the trial court, the following circumstances can be revealed: ① the defendant's her son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son'