The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of the mistake of facts, the Defendant’s act in this case does not constitute an indecent act committed by indecent act in the crime of indecent act because the victim allowed minor physical contact and did not feel a sense of sexual humiliation.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of suspended execution for six months of imprisonment, and forty hours of an order to attend a sexual assault treatment lecture) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. A judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts (1) Article 298 of the Criminal Act provides that “a person who, through violence or intimidation, commits an indecent act against another person” shall be punished as an indecent act by force.

However, the crime of indecent act by compulsion is a crime infringing the individual’s legal interest, which is an individual’s freedom of sexual liberty, and the phrase “indecent act” under the above legal provisions is insufficient solely for the fact that it causes a sense of sexual shame or aversion to the general public and goes against good sexual morality, and thus, it infringes on the victim’

In addition, the crime of indecent act by compulsion is established by indecent act by means of violence or intimidation, and the violence or intimidation is required to be such a degree that it is difficult to resist.

In addition, whether the assault, etc. was likely to make it difficult for the victim to resist shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances such as the content and degree of the assault, etc., the developments leading up to exercising force, the relationship with the victim, and the circumstances at the time of the indecent act and the subsequent circumstances.

(2) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the lower court’s duly admitted and investigated evidence, the Defendant can be found to have committed an indecent act to the extent that it infringes on the victim’s sexual self-determination by exercising his/her force to the extent that it would make it difficult to resist the victim at the time of the instant case. As such, the Defendant’s allegation is without merit.

The victim shall be the victim at an investigative agency and the defendant.