The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-finding: The defendant has not committed a crime stated in the facts charged.

B. Unreasonable sentencing: The sentence of the lower court (one-month imprisonment, two-year suspension of execution, 40 hours of community service order, and 40 hours of lecture order) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is a person who belongs to Samsung C&C and operates a taxi for business purpose.

On April 18, 2013, at around 07:50, the Defendant operated C cab and boarded the victim E (n, 20 years of age) in front of the Seoul Gangnam-gu D apartment distance, and continued to run approximately 30 minutes of the cost to the Fside area of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, which is the direction of the victim's house. The victim, while under the influence of alcohol, diced the victim into plastic gambling and knife the knife, knife the knife of the victim, knife the knife of the victim into the knife in the knife of the victim, while the victim was suffering from the knife, and continued to spread the victim's chest with the knife of the victim.

The Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim until he arrives in the front of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Seoul, a destination.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the victim’s legal statement, police statement, and accusation.

C. According to the factual records and arguments recognized, the following circumstances are recognized.

① The reason why the victim reported that an indecent act was committed by the police seems to be attributable to the Defendant’s demand for taxi expenses of KRW 24,000, unlike the victim’s expectation that the victim would bring about a taxi expense of less than KRW 20,00.

The victim asserts that the victim did not calculate the taxi fee by means of the card (credit card or physical card) in receipt of the demand for taxi expenses after arrival at the destination, and that he was calculated by other customers, despite the fact that he did not calculate the taxi fee.