The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case even though he did not commit an indecent act against the victim as stated in the facts charged was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below and the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts: ① the statement made by the investigative agency and the court below on the grounds that the victim was involved in an indecent act and the defendant was identified as the offender is specific and consistent; there is no motive or reason to see the victim's false fact-finding and to injure the defendant; ② the defendant's statement appears to be highly reliable; ② the defendant's physical contact with the victim was made with the victim without doubt, but the defendant appears to have been aware of the victim's intention of indecent act in full view of the following circumstances: (i) the statement made by the investigative agency and the court below on the grounds that the victim was identified as the offender; (ii) the victim was identified as the victim's face through several times; and (iii) the victim's assertion of mistake of facts is just and there is no motive or reason to injure the victim; and (iv) the defendant's statement made to the effect that the victim was made with intention to commit an indecent act. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is justified.

B. The Defendant’s primary crime is the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, and the fact that the Defendant was unable to find employment due to the instant case is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the Defendant does not seem to have an attitude against the Defendant while continuously denying the instant crime, and the Defendant did not agree with the victim by the instant case to the point that the sexual humiliation of the victim was unreasonable due to the occurrence of the instant crime, and the Defendant did not reach the judgment.