The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In addition, the defendant is aware of the fact that the victim's chest was spanty of the victim, but he did not put his finger into the victim's panty, and the victim spanes together with the spanty with the spanty of the victim, and spanssa by taking the spanss and spansssa, and the victim spanssa, and the defendant spanssa even though the defendant stated "in the four spansa," and the defendant spanssa in the fact that he was "in the four spansa," and the defendant was

Nevertheless, the court below found that the defendant, with the intent of indecent act by compulsion, was able to talk about the victim's chest and put the victim's panty in the victim's panty, has erred by mistake of facts.

B. The court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles in holding that the victim did not constitute an indecent act under the Criminal Act even though he did not suffer sexual injury or infringed on his right to sexual self-determination, in light of various circumstances following the instant case, since the victim was trying to feel harsh at the time of the instant indecent act, it constitutes an indecent act under the Criminal Act even though the victim did not constitute an indecent act under the Criminal Act because he was unable to be deemed to have suffered sexual injury or infringed on his right to sexual self-determination in light of the fact that the victim voluntarily taken out tobacco in the Defendant’s household room after the instant indecent act was committed.

C. The sentence of the lower judgment against the Defendant on unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of probation, two hundred hours of community service order, and eight hours of order to attend sexual assault treatment lectures) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records, the judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts (1) reveals that ① the victim has made a relatively concrete and consistent statement at the investigative agency up to the original trial, and ② the victim’s chest at the time of the instant case to the Defendant on October 3, 2012.