The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as follows.

1) As to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (limited to relatives) under Article 1(1) of the judgment of the court below, the Defendant did not have any memory of committing such crime. Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges by taking only the victim’s statement. 2) As to the larceny, the Defendant merely brought the victim’s finger wheels with the victim’s consent, and did not commit the theft, the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, two years and six months of imprisonment, etc.) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged is the pro-friendly relationship between the Defendant and the victim B (the age of 27). On August 2018, the Defendant discovered the Defendant’s mother D’s home located in Ansan-si, Sinsan-si, a member C of the Defendant’s mother D, who visited D in order to talk with D, and then left the victim’s seat by taking advantage of the victim’s inner part. Accordingly, the lower court determined that the Defendant committed an indecent act by taking advantage of the victim’s condition where the Defendant was diving and was unable to resist. 2) In so doing, the lower court erred by taking advantage of the circumstances indicated in its reasoning, namely, ① the victim voluntarily and specifically stated about the time, place, situation, etc. of the indecent act as stated in the facts charged, and the content of the statement is unreasonable or unreasonable; ② the victim made a false statement or exaggeration in the investigative agency to make a statement about the damage inflicted by the victim.