The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant was only flickly flock with the victim’s son, but did not commit an indecent act due to her mar, etc., and was intended to engage in personnel affairs, and there was no intention to commit an indecent act on the part of the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (2 million won, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion that the victim’s her her son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s her son’s son’s son

In light of the records, a thorough examination of the judgment of the court below is just and the defendant's assertion on this is without merit.

나 아가 엉덩이를 친 행위가 엉덩이를 만진 것과는 다르다는 취지로 주장하나 엉덩이를 친 행위도 엉덩이를 만진 행위의 하나의 태양( 態樣 )으로 보이므로 위 주장도 이유 없다.

On the other hand, as to the argument that there was no intention to commit an indecent act on the part of the victim, the record reveals that there was a situation in which the female or friend of the defendant at the time of the crime in this case, and the male or friend of the victim at the time of the crime in this case, and the victim did not appear to have any particular response to the defendant even during the victim's male or friend, but even if the defendant tried to engage in personnel affairs in a color atmosphere, there is no reason to friend the victim's am, and there is no reason to recognize the criminal intent of the defendant at least in light of the victim's behavior, etc., and the subjective elements necessary for the establishment of the crime of indecent act in this case are sufficient only with intention, and there is no subjective motive or purpose to stimulate, friend, and satisfy other sexual desire (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Do1789, Jul. 23, 2015).