Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (misunderstanding of facts) did not send the victim a text message identical to the facts charged.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence (unfair sentencing) of the lower court (2 million won in penalty amount, and 24 hours in completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserted to the same purport in the lower court’s judgment as to the grounds for appeal by the Defendant. However, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion and convicted the Defendant of the instant charges on the ground that the possibility that a third party, other than the Defendant, was committed by taking account of the details and progress of the use of text messages, the content of the message indicated in the facts charged, and the attitude presented by the Defendant and D, was merely abstract possibility not constituting a reasonable doubt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 8Da3, supra). On the 3rd of the lower judgment, the lower court’s judgment was examined closely with the record, and the following circumstances acknowledged by evidence, namely,, the Defendant sent text messages to the Defendant on July 28, 2016 and around 18:59 on the same day, and the Defendant did not appear to have any error of law by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant sent text messages to the Defendant and the victim’s message on the same day on the same day, and on the same day, the lower court did not have any error in its judgment.

Therefore, it is true.