The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for one year from the date of the final judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Erroring facts, the Defendant only contacted the victim with knenee, not with the victim’s knebbbbbbs, in a state where clothes provided in the soup bank were taken, and there was no fact that the victim’s knee was sexually fucked in the victim’s bucks.

B. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, although the Defendant did not use assault in the course of the instant indecent act, and the indecent act without assault should be punished as a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act at Public Exemplary Places), thereby punishing the Defendant as an indecent act under the Criminal Act.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two months of imprisonment) is more severe.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of the lower judgment regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s sexual organ against the victim’s bucks as stated in the instant facts charged can be sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

① The victim consistently stated at the investigative agency that “I am soup supbucks were cut about 5 to 6 times by the Defendant, and the Defendant again sup the bucks about 3 to 4 times by sending out the bucks, so I am sup about 2 to 3 times in the bucks and the Defendant’s sexual part, so I saw the Defendant’s escape. After which the Defendant was unfolded, the Defendant again supbbbbbbbbbs that were 5 to 6 times in the bucks.” On the other hand, the Defendant again saw the bucks around the bucks where the Defendant was unfolded even after sup, and the Defendant did not have any response, and thus, the Defendant again dumbbbbbbbbbs that were 5 to 4 to 5 times in the front of the buck.”

(2) The aggrieved person has made a specific statement that he/she has suffered the said damage, and such statement is made.