The guilty part of the judgment of the court of first instance and the second judgment shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The judgment of the court of first instance which convicted the Defendant of injury by indecent act by indecent act, although the Defendant did not commit an indecent act against L, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle that affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The sentence of the judgment of the court of unfair sentencing (the judgment of the court of first instance: imprisonment of three years and six months, completion of sexual assault treatment programs, 40 hours, and 2 months: imprisonment of six months) is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment of the court of first instance, even though the defendant could be found to have committed robbery by forceing the victim L's bank as an unlawful acquisition intent, thereby leading to the occurrence of the robbery. 2) The sentence of the judgment of the court of second instance (six months of imprisonment) of the judgment of the court of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The first, first, second, and second, following a separate examination on the grounds for appeal by authority prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by authority, the first, the first, second, and second, the first and second court rendered a judgment of conviction against the defendant, and the defendant and the prosecutor appealed against each of the above judgments, and the court decided to concurrently examine the above appeals case. The first and the second court's conviction against the defendant are in a concurrent relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and all of the offenses of the first and the second court's judgment against the defendant are in a concurrent relationship under Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act and must be sentenced to a single sentence within the term of punishment aggravated by concurrent crimes under Article 38 (1) of the Criminal Act

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court, and the prosecutor's assertion of mistake on the acquittal part of the judgment of the court of first instance is subject to the judgment of this