All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

As to the crime No. 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two months, and the first instance court.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. There was no intention to commit an indecent act against the defendant with respect to each indecent act by mistake of facts (Article 2 and 3 of the Judgment of the court below).

B. The punishment sentenced by each court below (Article 1: 4 months of imprisonment with prison labor for crimes No. 2 as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, and Articles 1 and 3 as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, 6 months of imprisonment, and 2: 4 months of imprisonment with prison labor) is too unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination (the part concerning the judgment of the court below in the first instance), this Court held that this case was consolidated and tried as an appeal against each judgment of the court below. However, the crimes of Articles 1, 3 and 2 as stated in the judgment of the court below are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, and should be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of a term of punishment aggravated for concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the part concerning the crimes of Articles 1, 3 and 2 as stated in the judgment of

(1) The defendant's assertion of mistake of facts as to the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance is still subject to the judgment of the court of this case, even though there are reasons for ex officio reversal of facts as to the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and this is examined as to the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance.

3. The judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts (Article 2 and 3 of the judgment of the court below) also held that the Defendant had the same assertion in the first instance court, and that the first instance court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by taking into account the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated.

Examining the above judgment of the first instance court in comparison with the evidence, the first instance court's judgment is just and acceptable, and it cannot be deemed that there was an error of mistake of facts in the first instance judgment, as alleged by the defendant.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

4...