The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, the period of three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, and two hundred hours of community service order) is deemed to be too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. The Defendant’s mistake was recognized in the first instance.

The defendant is an initial criminal who has no record of criminal punishment.

However, even though the defendant knew that he want to make a comfortable living in the military and knew that he had contacted his body due to a locked mistake, he filed a complaint with a person suspected of committing an indecent act by forceing another person, and made a false testimony by taking advantage of the fact that his intelligence constitutes the boundary level and the overall recognition ability is insufficient. Therefore, the crime is bad, and the motive for committing the crime is extremely poor.

Although the verdict of innocence against a person who is not guilty does not actually lead to criminal punishment, the crime of the criminal defendant is extremely bad in that the criminal defendant was committed in the course of investigation and trial, and in that it is an offense for which a person who is not guilty may be punished with severe punishment (the Military Criminal Act is heavier than the criminal law). Considering the attitude in the court of the criminal defendant, etc. at the court of law, the criminal defendant's wrong is divided into the criminal defendant's wrong.

It is not visible.

In full view of such circumstances as well as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed, the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unfair.

3. Since the appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the appeal is again decided as follows.

[Re-written judgment] The summary of facts constituting an offense and the evidence admitted by the court and the summary of the evidence are as follows: the judgment of the court below does not add "the defendant's oral statement" to the column for the evidence.