The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although misunderstanding of facts made the victim E (hereinafter “victim”), there was no fact that the victim threatened the victim as they were spawn spawn, the court below convicted the defendant of the facts charged in this case, and there was an error of law by misunderstanding of facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the above erroneous determination of facts in the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing, the punishment imposed by the court below (the fine of 300,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, i.e., ① the victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below, consistently stated from August 12, 2013 to the court of the court of the court below, that “the defendant attempted to arbitrate a sexual harassment to himself and tried to do so by the chief of the F office, which was the preceding day of the case, and the defendant was dismissed at all, and the defendant was present at the office around 08:33 August 13, 2013, which was the day of the case, and that “the defendant will clearly express the police station, and will do so as to do so,” and that “the witness G has consistently made a statement to the effect that it threatens the victim to have a strong and threatened police station,” and that “the victim might be punished by the suppression and threat of the victim on the day of the case at the investigative agency of the case.”

"는 취지로 진술하고, 원심 법정에서도 '시간이 많이 흘러 당시 상황이 기억이 잘 나지 않지만 피고인이 피해자를 때리려고 하는 시늉을 하는 것을 보았다

‘A statement to the effect that’ is stated, and ③ H said statement to the effect that “the victim was sexual harassment from the Defendant” at an investigative agency.