The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

A. In fact, misunderstanding the legal principles and misunderstanding that the defendant puts the fingers into the victim's sexual organ, but the victim was not in a state of being locked due to drinking at the time of the case, and even if so, the victim was not in such state.

Even if the defendant did not recognize the mental and physical loss of the victim, he did the above act with the knowledge that he did not consent.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (a two-year suspended sentence of imprisonment, a three-year and forty-hour suspension order for sexual assault treatment lecture, an order for 80 hours community service order) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court was clearly erroneous, in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial and the result of further examination of evidence conducted by the court of first instance until the closing of pleadings, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do5313, Jun. 14, 2012). 2) In light of such legal principles, the first instance judgment on the instant case should be examined in light of the following additional circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court of first instance by the court below and the court of first instance.