The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as described in this part of the facts charged, committed a physical contact with the victim as described in this part of the facts charged. However, the Defendant merely committed an indecent act with the victim’s permission on the part of the victim with the mind that the victim was bad as a man, and did not intend to commit an indecent act by force.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of facts, the term “comfort conduct” of the relevant legal doctrine refers to an act objectively causing sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and contrary to good sexual moral sense, which infringes on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether the act constitutes such an act should be determined carefully by comprehensively taking into account not only the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship between the perpetrator and the victim prior to the act, circumstances leading to the act, specific manner leading to the act, objective situation surrounding the age, sexual morality, etc. It does not require any subjective motive or purpose to stimulate, stimulate, and satisfy sexual desire as a subjective element necessary for the establishment of the crime of indecent act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do556, Sept. 26, 2013). In other words, the Defendant’s act of indecent act is not only an indecent act committed after the other party’s assault or intimidation, but also an indecent act is also an indecent act committed act against the other party’s will, regardless of whether it is against the other party’s specific intent (see Supreme Court Decision 20020Da1606).