The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

For the defendant 40 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) The Defendant did not commit an indecent act by compulsion against the victim’s G as stated in the lower judgment.

The victim G's statement that meets the above criminal facts is not reliable.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

(2) The sentence of the lower judgment on unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the prosecutor’s (1) misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal principle G’s statement, the defendant can be found to have committed indecent act by compulsion against victim D.

Nevertheless, among the facts charged in the instant case, the lower judgment that acquitted the victim D as quasi-indecent act by compulsion is erroneous in misapprehending the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant made the same assertion as the grounds for appeal in this part of the judgment below regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts.

The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the ground that, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted, the victim G’s statement consistent with the facts constituting the crime is deemed to have credibility.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law affecting the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

① A victim G had no special problem with intelligence or expression ability as a middle student under 13 years of age. A relatively consistent and specific statement was made on the method and circumstances of the instant indecent act.

② At around 00:30 on September 15, 2012, the above victim suffered from the Defendant and immediately after being forced to commit indecent acts in the train, the fact of the date’s damage and the previous time’s injury to the DefendantJ.