The judgment of the court below is reversed.

No. 1-A of the judgment of the defendant

In respect to a crime, the remaining crimes as stated in the judgment shall be punished for two months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

(a) The prosecutor (unfair in form) sentence of the lower court (the 1th (the 1th (A.A. in the form of punishment): imprisonment with prison labor for 2 months; imprisonment for 1 year; order to complete sexual assault treatment programs; 40 hours after order to complete employment restriction programs; 3 years after order to impose employment restriction); and confiscation) is too unflu

B. Defendant 1) On April 24, 2017, Defendant 1 did not have any fact that the Defendant, as indicated in this part of the facts charged, did not follow the victim’s behind drinking or giving out the victim a view of exceeding the victim, as stated in this part of the facts charged, and there is no credibility in the victim’s statement consistent with this part of the facts charged. Therefore, the lower court convicted Defendant 1 of this part of the facts charged

B) On February 2018, the Defendant did not photograph the victim’s sexual organ at the time and place indicated in this part of the facts charged. As such, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, on April 2018, on the ground that the Defendant did not have taken the victim’s sexual organ at around the date and time indicated in this part of the facts charged, nor did the Defendant take the victim’s sexual intercourse with a video image around April 2018, on the part of the Defendant, in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a camera, etc. taken the victim’s sexual intercourse with a video around April 2018, and there was only a recorded sound of the given sexual relationship.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts, and there is no fact that the defendant sent a photograph that only the victim wears a telecommunication roll in the state of her body, as stated in this part of the facts charged, to the victim-friendly O. Thus, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. 2) The judgment of the court below of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable because the defendant's punishment of the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The lower court’s judgment on April 24, 2017 part of the assault committed by April 24, 2017.