All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The statement of the victim of the victim is not reliable, and even if part of the victim's statement is true, since the victim's statement is a verbal expression that can be done between his father and his father who rears his father for a long time, there was no intent to commit an indecent act against the defendant.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous.

B. The prosecutor (unfair punishment) sentenced by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution, etc.) is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, “Indecent act by force against a minor under the age of 13” under Article 7(5) and (3) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes is protected by the legal interest of “the right and interest to form sexual identity and values without psychological disorder in the absence of an inappropriate sexual stimulation or physical power from outside.” It does not require any subjective motive or purpose to stimulate sexual humiliation as a subjective element necessary for its establishment (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Do6791, Jan. 13, 2006). The “indecent act” in the above crime cannot be deemed to have an essential difference depending on physical parts (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do52, Apr. 16, 2004), and whether it constitutes an act of causing sexual humiliation or sexual humiliation against the victim’s average person who is objectively identical with the other party, and thus, constitutes an act of causing sexual humiliation or sexual morality against the victim’s sexual moral sense and sexual morality.