The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Even if the victim misunderstanding the fact gets a sense of shame, there was no intention to commit an indecent act against the victim from the Defendant’s standpoint.

The judgment of the court below that judged otherwise cannot determine whether an indecent act was committed on the basis of the victim's subjective emotions, and whether the victim's objective body constitutes an indecent act, separate from whether the victim's objective body constitutes an indecent act, but without sexual intent, the defendant cannot be found guilty of the facts charged in this case.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the amount of KRW 3 million, the amount of KRW 200,000 and the amount of KRW 24 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of fact, “comforcing” in the crime of coercion under Article 298 of the Criminal Act refers to an act that causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public objectively and goes against good sexual morality, thereby infringing on the victim’s sexual freedom.

Determination as to whether an indecent act is an indecent act is an issue of normative evaluation that presents the perspective of the general public in the same situation as the victim, and does not require the motive or purpose of the actor, such as gender satisfaction.

Therefore, even if there was no subjective motive or purpose to stimulate sexual desire to the defendant, it can be said that it constitutes a forced indecent act.

On April 26, 2017, the day of the instant case, the victim sent K message to his father on the following circumstances: (i) the victim employed as a part-time student, and (ii) the victim, who had been employed as a part-time student, left the part of the victim’s left shoulder and the part of the gate was used in two times when he reported as a part-time member, and (iii) the victim submitted it to the police.