The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although a mistake of facts is likely to cause the victim to be locked while the defendant was locked, there is no intentional indecent act against the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the imprisonment for six months, the suspension of execution for two years, the community service order and the lecture order for sexual assault treatment for 40 hours each) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. We examine the argument of mistake of facts. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below. ① The victim stated in the investigative agency and court of the court below that “the defendant was only juthly as the victim’s body, instead of rhythm, it is not able to capture, rhythm, and rhym,” and the victim’s attitude at the time of the crime, including the defendant’s attitude, the defendant’s attitude immediately after the crime, and the situation before and after the crime. ② Even though there were many spaces in which the defendant was able to sleep within a sobry, the defendant took place without bending about about 30 cm with the victim, ③ The defendant was 13:50 minutes from the time of the crime, which was 03:37 minutes prior to the victim’s body, and the victim’s 30:50 minutes from the victim’s body could not be found to have been forced.

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

B. The sentencing on the assertion of unfair sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, and the sentencing is executed within a reasonable and reasonable scope, taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act.