The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

information about the defendant for five years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The victim was only rhymd with misunderstanding of facts and did not commit an indecent act against the victim.

B. The instant crime of mental illness is under the influence of alcohol and has been committed in a state of mental disability.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The six-year location tracking electronic device attachment period imposed on the accused and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") shall be excessive for a long time.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant also asserted the same purport as the above grounds for appeal, and the lower court rendered a judgment on the part of “the judgment on the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion”.

In addition to the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, namely, ① the statement made by the victim and witness conform to the specific, consistent, and empirical rule, and ② the victim’s statement is considered to be a content based on the facts of experience as a variety of supplementary information, etc. are also mentioned and false and difficult facts are found. In addition, other circumstances of this case, which can be seen through other evidence, can be acknowledged by the defendant’s access to the victim and the fact of indecent act by compulsion, such as the victim’s chest part is visible and her her her son part is limited. Thus, the judgment of the court below convicting the defendant of the charge is just and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding facts.

This part of the Defendant’s assertion is difficult to accept.

B. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the claim of mental disability, the defendant is found to have served alcohol at the time of the crime of this case, but the same is recognized.