The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

The defendant shall be treated for sexual assault for 80 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The facts charged that interfered with the filing of public prosecution do not specify the original content of the completion paper, the replacement of the Defendant, etc., and thus, it is difficult for the Defendant to defend.

This constitutes "where the procedure of filing a public action is null and void in violation of the provisions of the law" under Article 327 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

B. In 2006, the Defendant merely agreed on several times after having sexual intercourse at the office of publication of books with D, and there was no other sexual intercourse by assaulting and threatening D.

D It is difficult to understand in a common sense that it is difficult for women who work as Japanese language instructors from time to time during the 10-year period of sexual assault with a detailed statement of the facts that 2 to 10-year period of receipt of the complaint and that women who have already been experienced in gender relations 3,40.

Both the family members of the defendant and D have made a religious life in the O church, and the defendant has made a false confession to protect them.

However, there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the fact that the charge of rape was found guilty.

B) The Defendant does not arbitrarily change the word “F” related to B pastors’ “F” and the word “F”, or arbitrarily insert any content that does not conform to the context.

However, in the process of preparing such a thesis, the defendant may make a mistake or mistake the acceptance of each share.

Defendant made a false confession at the original trial without choice to protect family members and punishment.

However, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts charged as guilty of obstruction of business affairs and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(c)

The punishment of the court below (the imprisonment of five years and the completion of 80 hours for sexual assault treatment programs) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2...