The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 80 hours.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., the Defendant’s mistake, the occurrence of contingent crimes, and the agreement with the victim, the punishment imposed by the lower court against the Defendant (e.g., imprisonment for a period of five years and eight hours) is too unreasonable.

2. The instant crime committed by the Defendant, when entering the apartment building according to the female victim, was committed by the Defendant, sparing the password of the entrance in front of the victim’s house entrance, and committing an indecent act by several times of the victim’s chests, the nature of the crime is very poor.

The victim seems to have suffered mental shock and pain due to the crime of this case.

In addition, even though the defendant had been punished for committing an attempted rape in 2009, it is said that the possibility of criticism is higher than that of this case, which is the same kind of crime.

However, on the other hand, the Defendant appears to have an attitude against the Defendant when recognizing the instant crime. On the other hand, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant came to have committed the instant crime; (b) the Defendant did not want punishment against the Defendant by mutual consent with the victim; and (c) the Defendant’s age, environment, motive and circumstance of the instant crime, means and consequence; and (d) the circumstances after the instant crime were committed, the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed to require mitigation.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is justified.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is with merit. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following judgment is rendered again.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is the same as that of the judgment below, so Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act is the same as that of the judgment below.