The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the misunderstanding of facts could have contacted the body of the victim, the defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim as stated in the facts charged, and did not intend to commit an indecent act against the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of suspended sentence in June, community service order 80 hours, and 40 hours of lecture attendance order for sexual assault treatment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of fact and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by this court, the Defendant’s intentional indecent act against the victim is sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is justified, and the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

1) The victim has consistently stated in the investigative agency and the court below on the following details: (a) the process and before and after the instant indecent act; (b) the attitude of the commission of the act; and (c) the developments leading up to the conviction of an intentional indecent act, not the actual cost, as follows.

① At around 15:00 on April 13, 2015, the aggrieved party knee, knee, knee, knee, and knee, knee, knee, kneeing the Defendant’s golf hole located in CD golf course located in G, which is located in the direction of the victim. The Defendant, after the victim, etc., put the part of the knee into the lower part of the victim’s bridge and contacted the part of the knee, and knee, knee, knee, knee.

② The victim did not speak too far, and dried the Defendant, and the Defendant also dried up once after playing.

③ The victim, after completing the 13th hole, notified the toilet I of the fact that sexual indecent act was committed by telephone, and demanded the replacement of the toilet with another glar.

2) At the time of the instant case, trading accompanied by the Defendant was conducted.

J did not directly witness the Defendant’s indecent act by attending the court of the first instance, but at 13 times, the victim sleeped his eye, and the victim “(12 times alone).”