The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant of mistake of facts in the judgment of the court below was only the victim at the time and place stated in the facts constituting the crime, and did not forcibly commit the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. According to Article 2 of the Addenda to the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act, which was amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018, and enforced as of June 12, 2019, Article 59-3(1) of the aforementioned Act applies to a person who has committed a sex offense before the enforcement of the aforementioned Act and has not been finally and conclusively determined, this court should examine and determine whether the Defendant issued an employment restriction order against welfare facilities for disabled persons and the period of employment restriction.

The above employment restriction order is an incidental disposition that is sentenced simultaneously with the conviction of a sex offense case, and even if there is no error in the conviction part of the judgment below, the judgment below is no longer maintained, but the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below

3. In light of the circumstances stated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the victim’s statement that the Defendant had been made by indecent act, such as the date and time indicated in its ruling, was reliable, and thus, the facts constituting the crime can be acknowledged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower court in comparison with the evidence examined, the lower court’s fact-finding and judgment are justifiable, and there was no error by misapprehending the facts, thereby adversely affecting the judgment.

4. The court below's decision is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided after oral argument.

[Discied Judgment] The same as the relevant column of the judgment of the court below on criminal facts and the summary of evidence.

The laws and regulations;