Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the person whose attachment order is requested and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

In addition, the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendants") asserts that there was misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (the guilty part in the original judgment) and the defendant set a soup within the sobry soup, and made a shower at the male shower room, and there was only the fact that he did so at the male shower room, and there was no indecent act committed against the victim D, or damage to the property owned by the victim C, such as the criminal facts in the original trial, and the victim D stated that "the criminal was wearing an ear," but at the time, the defendant did not have any difference in the fact that she worn an ear.

Nevertheless, the lower court that convicted all of the facts constituting the crime is unlawful.

The court below's decision on the grounds of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

In light of the prosecutor's misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (not guilty part at the time of the original trial) that the defendant entered the office of the victimJ at around 00:20, and the change of the defendant's defense that he left the office late time is hard to believe, and in light of the statement of theJ, etc., the court below accepted the defendant's defense without credibility despite the fact that the defendant committed the crime, and acquitted the defendant.

The sentence of the lower court on the assertion of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

However, in light of the evidence revealed by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal doctrine as to the part of the Defendant’s case, the lower court, as alleged in the Defendant’s assertion, committed an indecent act against the victim D by entering a women’s waters room within sobrying and damaging property owned by the Defendant C, and sufficiently recognized the facts that damaged property owned by the Defendant C, as so argued by the Defendant, did not err in matters of

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument cannot be accepted.

(1) A victim;