The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that found the victim of mistake of facts guilty of the facts charged of this case without credibility is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Since the victim of the misapprehension of the legal principle can fully exercise his right to sexual self-determination, the defendant committed sexual abuse against the child.

No person shall be deemed to have committed an indecent act against a disabled child or juvenile.

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (eight months of imprisonment, forty hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program, and three years of employment restriction order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The probative value of evidence is left to a judge’s free evaluation of facts, but such determination must be consistent with logical and empirical rules. The degree of the formation of conviction to find a defendant guilty in a criminal trial is to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. However, it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence causing a suspicion without reasonable grounds, which is recognized as having probative value, is not allowed beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Do1335, Sept. 13, 1994; 2004Do221, Jun. 25, 2004). The victim’s statement is consistent with the main contents of the statement, and there is no part inconsistent or inconsistent with the statement in light of the empirical rule, and as long as the motive or reason for the defendant to lawfully make a false and unfavorable statement is not clearly revealed, the court’s rejection of the credibility of the statement by the victim and the victim’s evidence without justifiable reasons (see, 2006. 16).