The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and eight months.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 40 hours.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles) is as follows: (a) while the defendant was living in the vehicle of the defendant who intends to move the victim to his house on the day of the instant case, the victim was forced to have telephone conversations with his father and telephone conversations with his wife on the day of the instant case; and (b) there was no fact that the defendant attempted to rape the victim as stated in this part of the charges.

The direct evidence that corresponds to the facts charged in this part is the only evidence of the victim's statement. ① The victim's statement was made on the day of the instant case, ② the victim was stolen while getting off the Defendant's wall on the day of the instant case, ② the defendant was in dispute with other vehicles and reported to the police on his own. The time of the report was 23:00, but the time of reporting the victim's attempted rape was 23:30, the time of reporting the victim's attempted rape was 23:30, and there is contradiction between the two times. ③ The domestic company discovered in the Defendant's driver's set is not the blood trace, but the victim's statement is the ice state, ④ the type of the load that the victim suffered at the time of the instant case, ④ the victim's statement is not consistent, ⑤ the victim's statement is not consistent with the victim

Although the defendant's vehicle stated that it is a structure that can not be placed behind the victim's body at a time, unlike the victim's statement, it is the structure that the defendant can not be placed behind the victim's body at a time. 6) The defendant has recently been in a state that it is difficult to suppress the victim by force due to the recent left hand hand, 7) the defendant has already existed before the case, and 8) the victim stated that the defendant exceeded all his lab and his clothes and went back to the victim's body, but did not see the defendant's gender.

(9) The injured party is a victim if he/she gets off his/her clothes, and the injured party went out of the vehicle, because the statements, such as statements, are contradictory to each other, and as alleged by the injured party, he/she exceeded the clothes of the injured party.