The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Reasons for appeal

A. No. 1-A of the facts constituting a crime as indicated in the judgment of the court below is the fact that there was no physical contact with regard to the above paragraph.

In relation to the crime No. 1-B. of the judgment of the court below, the victim's body was contacted, but it is not an act for sexual purpose.

In relation to the crime No. 2 of the judgment below, although there is a fact that the body of the victim was contacted, it is not the intention of indecent act as it was long as the victim was in distress.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (paragraphs 1 and 2-A. of the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the lower judgment: Imprisonment with prison labor for three years and six months, and imprisonment with labor for two years and six months, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts in the lower judgment, the Defendant asserted the same purport in the lower court as to the instant paragraphs 1-A and 2 of the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the lower judgment.

As to this, the court below, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, explained in detail the facts and circumstances (as stated in the judgment below Nos. 9 through 12 of the sentence of the court below), and rejected the defendant's assertion, and attempted to use the victim's resistance impossible condition under 13 years of age to commit the act of similarity by using the victim's resistance. However, the court below determined that the defendant was guilty of being the victim's locked, and that the defendant did not commit an attempted act because the victim was locked due to the victim's slive sense, and the victim was locked (as stated in the judgment below, No. 1-A of the facts constituting the crime of the court below) and that the defendant committed an indecent act against the relative related person (as stated in the judgment below, No. 2 of the crime of the court below).

Examining the above circumstances revealed by the court below in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the records of this case, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of law of misunderstanding of facts as alleged by the defendant.

Meanwhile, the facts constituting the crime No. 1-B. of the judgment below.