All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by two years and six months of imprisonment.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the injury of the victim M in the facts of the crime stated in the judgment of the second instance judgment, Defendant (1) was erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misapprehending the facts, although the injury of the victim M cannot be deemed to be caused by the Defendant’s act.

(2) The sentence of the 2nd judgment decision regarding sentencing (2 years of suspended sentence for 10 months of imprisonment, 160 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor’s first decision to suspend the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years, community service order for 80 hours, and sexual assault treatment lectures for 40 hours) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal.

(2) The court held that each appeal case against the judgment of the court below was consolidated and tried, and that each of the offenses of the judgment of the court below is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and shall be sentenced to one punishment in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.

(3) In addition, the prosecutor filed an application for permission to amend the Bill of Amendment to the Criminal Act with the name of the crime against the part of the indictment of the first instance judgment (a group, deadly weapon, etc.) as “special injury” under Article 3(1) and Article 2(1)3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act as “Article 258-2(1) and Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act” under Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 257(1) of the same Act, and the same court permitted the amendment.

(4) Therefore, the lower judgment was no longer maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of authority.

B. (1) According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant's side and the victim's side are under the influence of alcohol.