The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant did not commit an improper act under the influence of alcohol, there was no intention to commit an indecent act, and the victimized person did not feel sexual humiliation.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of four million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on these evidence, namely, ① according to the sexual morality concept of the present age, the act between the sexual intercourse does not constitute an indecent act, but may be committed for a long time between the same sex and the same sex.

Inasmuch as the Defendant and the victim are widely recognized, it cannot be determined that the Defendant’s act does not constitute an indecent act solely on the basis of the fact that the Defendant and the victim are women, and ② The victim did not speak immediately after the instant case, on the ground that there would be a concern that the issue would arise in the future when acquiring the qualification certificate as a requisite leader and employed as a requisite instructor, thereby causing a dispute over the refund of tuition fees with the Defendant, thereby causing a sense of sexual humiliation by the Defendant’s behavior.

In light of the fact that the defendant's act constitutes an indecent act in the crime of forced indecent act, and the defendant had the intention to commit an indecent act.

The decision is proper, and there is no error of misconception of facts as alleged by the defendant.

B. In full view of the circumstances that the court below rendered on the grounds of sentencing and all the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of this case, the sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant is deemed appropriate and is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's argument about the sentencing is without merit.

3. Conclusion.