All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding the fact that the Defendant did not have any intention to commit an indecent act against the victim as described in the facts charged in this case, but did not take charge of the victim's shoulder as stated in Paragraph 1 of the facts charged in this case, and the victim's intent was confirmed by having his fire extinguishing and so he was dead, and after having confirmed the victim's intent to do so, he did not take the center part of the victim's chest with his left hand in the upper part of the victim's upper part of the upper part of the victim's hand, and did not take the center part of the victim's chest as stated in Paragraph 2 of the facts charged in this case. This mere physical contact did not constitute an indecent act against the indecent act against the victim at the time, and there was no intention to commit an indecent act against the victim at the time. 2) The punishment (5 million won of fine, completion of sexual assault treatment program, 40 hours of sexual assault treatment program, and 3 years of employment restriction) sentenced by the court below of unfair sentencing is too unfair.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. 1) In determining the credibility of a statement made by a victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court shall assess the credibility of the statement, taking into account all the circumstances that are difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, such as the appearance and attitude of the witness, and the penance of the statement, which are hard to record in the witness examination protocol, after taking an oath before a judge, in order to determine the credibility of the statement made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). In a case where the statement made by the witness, including the victim, is mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, the court shall not dismiss the statement without permission, unless there is any other reliable evidence that can be objectively deemed to have no credibility (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012).

The consistency in this part is.