The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (the part concerning the crime of indecent act by force on September 30, 2016, which is the part concerning the crime of oil, the part concerning indecent act by force, the violation of law, or mistake of facts) put his hand on the shoulder of the victim B (the female, the age of 29, and the Japanese nationality) at the time and place of the lower judgment, and immediately ceased his act when the victim expressed his intention of refusal with the back, and there was no fact that the victim committed indecent act by force as stated in the lower judgment.

The victim's statement is inconsistent in the date when the victim reported the indecent act of the defendant to the appointed person, the place where the victim was placed at the scene of the case, and the part that the defendant asked "whether it is not good (the time of gender relationship as of August 4, 2016) or not good," even after the victim's death, is contrary to the common sense, and therefore, it is not reliable.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the victim guilty of this part of the facts charged by reliance on the victim’s statement is erroneous in the misapprehension of law or misconception of facts.

B. On August 3, 2016, the victim’s indecent act by compulsion on the part of the prosecutor (not guilty part, and mistake of facts) stated in the investigative agency and the court below that the victim committed an indecent act against the defendant. The statement is consistent with the main contents of the statement. There are only cases where the victim was unable to make some of the victim’s indecent act because the defendant continuously committed an indecent act against the victim’s telegraph. The victim’s statement was consistent in that the victim did not have I when the victim was committed an indecent act, and that the victim took part in the toilet when I returned to and talk. Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the victim of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the victim’s statement was not reliable, and there was an error of law by misunderstanding the fact that the victim did not have credibility in the victim’s statement. 2) The victim was employed in the K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”) and his personnel and the defendant, a customer, together with the full-time officer who returned to Korea.