The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant asserted misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles only attempted to satisfe the victim’s bridge, but did not satisfe the victim’s sound mind.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in finding the defendant guilty.

B. The lower court’s determination on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances and the evidence duly adopted and examined after the determination of facts as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts cannot be accepted.

The victim consistently stated the facts of indecent act by the defendant from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, and the defendant was first made at the time of the instant case, and there is no special reason to mislead the defendant or make a false statement on the defendant.

The Defendant alleged that he only tried to scam the victim’s scam on the bridge and did not look at the victim’s scam. However, the Defendant’s argument is that immediately after the indecent act was committed, the Defendant prevented the victim from leaving the scambling out of the scamba, first of all, about 10 seconds of the scamba, so that the victim could not get out of the scamba, and then immediately left the scam scam or south, and that the Defendant did not appeal the victim who scambafing from the scene immediately after the crime of this case or the victim’s scambaf F by talking about such circumstances, and did not appeal the victim’s scambaf, or the victim’s scambaf, at the time of the indecent act. In light of the fact that the victim clearly stated that the Defendant

The victim made a concrete statement from the investigative agency that "a male who does not have the head of the autopsy committed an indecent act against himself/herself," and at the time F was moving from the leba.