The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant, while showing the developments at the time of the misunderstanding of the fact, had a physical contact with the victims in the process of playing with the victims, he did not have the intent to commit the act.

B. The sentence of the lower court (the completion of a sexual assault treatment program with 2 years and 6 months and 80 hours of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of factual misunderstanding, the term “comfort conduct” in the crime of indecent act by force of relevant legal principles refers to an act objectively causing sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and contrary to good sexual morality, which infringes on the victim’s sexual freedom. The determination as to whether it constitutes such an act ought to be made carefully by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship between the offender and the victim before the offender, circumstances leading to the act, specific manner leading to the act, the surrounding objective situation, and the sexual moral sense of that time (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2417, Apr. 26, 2002; 2015Do6980, Sept. 10, 2015). Meanwhile, the lower court’s subjective constituent elements necessary to establish the crime of indecent act ought to be sufficiently satisfied solely with the intent and subjective motive or objective to stimulate sexual humiliation, as well as to lawfully satisfy the following subjective motive or purpose (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2017Do63715.

① 피해자들은 모두 수사기관에서 ‘ 피고인이 강아지와 놀고 있는 피해자들을 창고로 데리고 간 후 피해자들이 서로 떨어져 있을 때 피해자들을 한 명씩 들어 올리거나 뒤쪽에서 안으면서 보물( 음부) 을 여러 차례 만졌는데, 기분이 나빴다.

창고에서 나온 후 할머니 댁으로 뛰어 도망갔다’ 라는 취지로 진술하고...