The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Sexual assault against the defendant for forty hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to Defendant 1’s act, this part of the Defendant’s act does not constitute an indecent act, but rather constitutes an indecent act in the course of forced indecent act, given that three persons are sitting together in the vehicle moving to the public prosecutor’s office after the opening of a meeting, the Defendant’s left hand and rhy the head of the victimized person, and the victim did not seem to have any reaction while recognizing the Defendant’s act. As such, it does not constitute an objective indecent act and does not constitute an indecent act in force.

B) As to Article 2 of the judgment, the Defendant did not enter the victim’s residence for the purpose of crime, but did not have any intention to intrude into the residence by opening the door.

C) As to the provisions of paragraphs (3) and (4) of the holding, the victim’s statement that corresponds to this part of the facts charged is not reliable, and there is no fact that the defendant assaulted or threatened the victim, and thus, it cannot be deemed that the crime of coercion or the crime of rape is established.

2) The sentence of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) against the wrongful defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence against the prosecutor (unlawful in sentencing) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the prosecutor applied for changes in indictment with the content that the facts charged are changed as stated in the following facts charged at the time of the trial. Since this court permitted this, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

Although there is a ground for ex officio reversal, the argument of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles of the defendant still is subject to the judgment of this court (the amendment of the indictment is merely an addition to some of the facts charged in the previous indictment).

3. Determination on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

(a) rule;