The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for eight years.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 80 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to CCTV images (Evidence No. 19) in which the first assault site against the victim H (a name) was taken by the misunderstanding of the facts, the time taken by the Defendant until the said victim assaulted following the said victim, sealed the shoulder of the said victim, and carried the victim into an outdoor parking lot is only one minute of the time. However, in the above CCTV images, it is not confirmed that the Defendant forcibly taken KRW 10,000 from the above victim, and even according to the CCTV image appraisal document (Evidence No. 6), even if the damage of the said victim was caused by the above CCTV, it is time time when the damage of the victim contacted the Defendant’s left hand, and 0.1 second, the time when the damage was caused by the above victim’s attacked with the Defendant’s secret, and was used between the card tag and the wall tag.

It is not physically possible to keep the defendant over the Chapter 5,00.

In addition, even if one witness is based on N's objective third party's testimony at the court of original trial, the above victim appears to have been holding 10,000 won at his own seat as at the time of boarding the taxi. However, according to the investigation report by the prosecutor's assistant, the defendant paid 10,000 won at an outdoor parking lot, not at the scene of violence, but at the time of the investigation by the prosecutor's assistant, it is judged that 10,000 won was forcibly taken from the outdoor parking lot, not at the scene of violence, and thus, it is deemed that the fact that the defendant took 10,000 won from the above victim was proven to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see it.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of taking 10,000 won against the above victim's statements without credibility, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (a punishment of 10 years of imprisonment, and orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs for 80 hours) is too excessive.