The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant does not have any misunderstanding of facts against the victim’s chest or her fry, or attempted to talk with the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (the fine of KRW 5 million, the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours, and the three years of employment restriction order) 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 on 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 declares simultaneously with the conviction of a sex offense case, and it is inevitable to reverse all of the judgment below even if it did not err in the conviction part. Thus, the judgment below cannot be maintained.

The judgment of the court below is a ground for ex officio reversal, but the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of the court.

3. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, found the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts that forced the Defendant to put his hand into the victim’s clothes and her chest and her butt will only look at, and attempted to keep his or her chest.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning of the lower court compared with the evidence examined, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable, and it did not err by misapprehending the facts, thereby affecting the conclusion of 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.

[Judgment of the court below] Summary of facts constituting a crime and evidence.