The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant is not guilty of committing an indecent act against the victim as stated in the facts charged.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (an amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant denied the instant facts charged at the lower court, and the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground that, in light of the overall content and attitude of the victim’s statement, such as the victim’s statement is consistent, and the part that the victim’s statement is not memoryd is credibility in the victim’s statement that the indecent act was committed as stated in its reasoning, and in light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, the specific form of the act and the objective situation surrounding the act, the Defendant’s act constitutes a so-called indecent act, and the intent thereof was also recognized.

2) In determining the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court shall assess the credibility of the statements, taking into account all the circumstances that make it difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, such as the victim’s own rationality, logic, inconsistency, or rule of experience, physical evidence, or third party’s statement before and after taking an oath before a judge, and the appearance, attitude, and perception of statement, etc. of the witness who is going to make it difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, and shall not reject the statement without permission, unless there is any other evidence that can objectively deem that the victim’s statements, including the victim, are consistent with the facts charged, objectively and objectively (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). In addition, when determining the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc., it shall be deemed that the witness’s memory in accordance with the rule of experience goes against the defendant or the victim’s general criminal act.