All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

In the statement of grounds for appeal submitted by the Defendant to this court, “mental and physical disorder” claims are stated, but the lower court recognized that the Defendant already committed each of the instant crimes in a state of mental disorder and declared that the Defendant was legally mitigated pursuant to Articles 10(2) and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act, and the Defendant stated that “the Defendant does not assert mental and physical disorder” during the first day of the trial of the trial of the first instance, and thus, did not separately determine

misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, the defendant is about to go against.

However, there was no intention to commit an indecent act against the victim because the victim's her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her but not

In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine or misconception of facts against the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.

The punishment sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The sentence imposed by the public prosecutor by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

It is unfair that the court below exempted the defendant from the disclosure notification order of personal information.

Judgment

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act by force of persons with disabilities) on the ground that the credibility of the victim’s statement is recognized in light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence at the time, namely, the consistent and specific point of the victim’s statement, the developments leading up to the victim’s statement and the relationship between the

In light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error as claimed by the defendant in this part of the judgment of the court below.

In addition, the court below duly adopted and investigated.