The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

The defendant shall be 120 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the part of indecent act against F by mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant committed an indecent act against F, while leaving school students as a school bus at the time, the Defendant remains at the last place, and the Defendant merely satisfed the body so that F does not go beyond F while driving, and even though there was no indecent act against F, such as the facts charged, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the remainder of this part of the facts charged, which was the only reliable statement made it difficult to believe as it is in light of the developments and contents of the statement, and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) Since the Defendant did not have committed violence or intimidation against the victims at the time of each of the instant crimes, the establishment of the crime of indecent act by force (Article 305 of the Criminal Act) is separately discussed, and the crime of indecent act by force cannot be established, but all of the instant charges were found guilty, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of indecent act, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of indecent act by force, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, 120 hours of order to complete the course, and 5 years of order to disclose or notify) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, legal doctrine, and the following additional circumstances recognized by the evidence rules, the lower court’s judgment (part 4-9 of the lower court’s decision) is lawful, and the Defendant’s assertion on the denial of forced indecent act against F is without merit. In so doing, the lower court’s judgment (part 4-9 of the lower judgment) is lawful, and the Defendant’s assertion on this part is without merit.

1. F has frequently finished the driving school bus of the Defendant before a school and caused the instant damage to the school, and F has become aware of the fact of the instant damage, and he/she has been consulted with school counselors upon the O’s recommendation.