The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 160 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine, since the Defendant did not enter the victim’s house against the victim’s will, thus, did not constitute a crime of intrusion on residence, and accordingly cannot be punished as an injury resulting from an indecent act by force on residence under the Act on Special Cases

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (7 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. 1) The lower court’s determination on the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine: (a) demanded the Defendant, who had the victim known, to explicitly leave the victim; and (b) there were several visits to the victim’s house in order to attract children due to the victim’s friendship with the victim; (c) however, there was a direct friendly relationship with the victim to the extent that he/she would have come into the victim’s residence without the victim’s permission.

Based on the fact that there seems to be no circumstance, the defendant recognized the fact that the defendant invadedd the residence against the victim's will.

2) According to the record, in light of the statements of the victim and witness, the background and contents of the crime of this case, the defendant's attitude and circumstances after the crime, the relationship between the victim and the defendant, etc., the defendant invaded upon the victim's residence against the victim's explicit or implied intent.

Therefore, the court below's decision that found the defendant guilty is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

B. As to the unlawful assertion of sentencing, the crime of this case committed by the Defendant, even though the Defendant committed the crime of this case while under probation, has committed the crime of this case. The Defendant committed the crime of this case, even though he committed the crime of this case even though he committed the crime of this case even though he was in the period of probation, committed the crime of this case.