The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In order to communicate with the victim who reported another place, the Defendant: (a) was placed adjacent to the victim’s buckbucks; and (b) was able to see the victim’s hand in his arms while dialogueing with the victim; (c) however, there was no fact that the victim’s buckbucks were only stored in the victim’s bucks and committed indecent act.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million, and an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., the victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, was exposed to the victim’s side bucks.

The fact of damage is consistently stated (the defense counsel stated that the victim was able to use the buckbuck paper in the investigative agency even if it was found). The court below stated that "the buckbbbbbbbbb was taken as it was examined" in the court of original instance, and therefore, it is not consistent.

However, although the victim's statement differs in minor expressions, it has consistency in the facts of indecent act, which is the main part of the crime of this case.

It is reasonable to see that it is)

② According to CCTV images, in full view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant was seated by the victim’s side; (b) the victim immediately thereafter could confirm that the victim was killed in front of the seat; (c) the Defendant also recognized the victim’s bucks, side by bucks; and (d) the victim was able to live in his arms while dialogueing with the victim; and (e) the Defendant committed indecent act by force.

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

B. The Criminal Litigation Act, which takes the principle of unfair trial-orientedness and directness in sentencing, has no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court in relation to the determination of sentencing.