The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact misunderstanding (as to the crime of violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (voluntary indecent act) in the holding), the Defendant merely contacted the victim's chest by provoking him/her, and there was no intention to drive the victim's chest, and there was no intention to drive the victim's chest.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts in light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of assessing credibility in accordance with the spirit of substantial direct deliberation adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act, the first instance court’s decision on the credibility of the statement made by the witness in the first instance trial was clearly erroneous in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court.

Except in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court by taking account of the results of the first instance examination and the results of an additional examination of evidence by the time the appellate trial ends, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2016Do5412, Jun. 15, 2018). 2) The lower court’s judgment also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal.

As to this, the lower court: (a) the victim stated consistently and specifically in the investigative agency and the court of the lower court at the time of the crime; and (b) the victim’s statement is not found to be unreasonable or contradictory; and (c) the credibility of the statement can be sufficiently recognized.