The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

except that, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts: (a) although the Defendant was able to see the victim C’s horses, the Defendant did not have her hand on his hand; (b) the lower court’s sentence is too heavy.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles constitute an indecent act that infringes on the victim’s sexual freedom. 2) The lower court’s sentence is too weak.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the fact-finding and determination by the lower court is justified, and it cannot be said that there was an error of mistake of facts as alleged by the Defendant.

The victim made a consistent statement from the investigative agency to the court of the court below as to the fact that “the Defendant led the Defendant to knickly knickly knife his knife his knife,” and the victim’s statement includes the specific contents that are difficult to make a statement without experience about the situation at the time, the front and rear circumstances, and the Defendant’s behavior

B. At the time of the instant case, three persons, including the husband’s husband, of the victim, were 3 to 5 to 10 meters away from the victim, and subsequently, H made a statement to the same effect as H in the investigative agency, stating that “The Defendant reported that he was able to take the victim’s knife, and she saw her her knife her knife her,” and that “h her knife her knife her knife her knife her,” and that the remainder 38th day of the evidence record of the instant case No. 3533, 2018.

The above evidence records Nos. 12, 13(c).

At the time H assaulted the Defendant’s timber, and the Defendant merely saw the victim as the Defendant’s assertion.