The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In spite of the fact that the Defendant was guilty of this part of the facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, even though the Defendant did not have committed indecent act by force against the victim, such as: (a) the victim was on board the bus in the instant case; (b) the victim was under the influence of alcohol by using the victim’s chest and dancing; and (c) the victim’s fingers with the victim’s chest or by inserting the fingers into the negative part.

B. In light of the legal principles, the Defendant’s act of spreading facts G and K, regardless of whether the Defendant’s sexual indecent act constitutes a crime of defamation against the Defendant, although the Defendant’s act did not constitute a crime of false accusation, the lower court convicting the Defendant of this part of the facts charged by misapprehending the legal doctrine as to the crime of false accusation, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) With respect to the assertion of mistake of fact, the degree of formation of a conviction for finding a guilty guilty in a criminal trial should be such a degree that there is no reasonable doubt, but to the extent that it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence which is recognized as having probative value by causing a suspicion without any reasonable ground is not allowed as exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. Thus, in a case where the statement of a witness is consistent in the main part of the statement, the credibility of the statement is not arbitrarily denied (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do12112, Aug. 20, 2009) on the basis of the above legal principle (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do1212, Aug. 20, 2009).