The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty even though the defendant did not assault or threaten the victim, is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principle that affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. The prosecutor of the judgment ex officio applied for changes in the part of the 4th and 5th of the facts charged that “the chest of the victim by releasing the broat was revealed, making the chest of the victim disclose, making the broat of the broat, preventing the broat of the victim from coming to broat, and making the broat of the broat, preventing the broat from coming to broat, and committing similar rapes with the victim” in the 8th and 9th of “the 8th of the 8th of the 9th of the 8th of the 8th of the 8th of the 9th of the 8th of the 8th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 5th of the 1

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

3. The lower court also asserted the same purport in the judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts. The lower court held that: (a) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence presented at the time of the lower judgment, namely, ① the police from the victim to the lower court court’s judgment, up to the time of the lower court’s trial, the Defendant intending to take the victim’s chest by hand, thereby preventing the Defendant from taking the victim’s arms and leaving the victim out; and (b) when the Defendant puts the Defendant’s grandchildren into the part of the victim, the Defendant’s grandchildren would have been lost; and (c) the Defendant exceeded the victim’s seat.