The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal does not constitute an indecent act against the victim as stated in the judgment below.

2. The lower court found the following circumstances based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., (i) the victim continued to see who was behind the Seoul subway No. 1 at the time of the instant case from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court in the front line of the trial, and was faced with plucking, plucking, etc. of one’s own son because he was unable to attend any further, and he was plucked by plucking, etc. of his her son, who was in the front line of the Seoul subway No. 1 at the time of the instant case; and (ii) the victim was found to have been unable to have made a statement in the first line of the facts charged by the Defendant at the time of his son’s statement in the first line of the facts charged by him; and (iii) the victim was found to have never been aware of his son’s son’s son’s son’s son at the time of his statement in the first line of the prosecution.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just, and the defendant's assertion of mistake is not accepted.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.