The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

except that the ruling shall be made for one year from the date of the final judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The victim of mistake of facts did not state his failure to resist at the time of the instant case.

The defendant shall not have committed an indecent act against the victim by taking advantage of the victim's failure to resist.

B. Even if the facts charged of this case were to be found guilty, in light of the fact that the defendant reached an agreement with the victim and reached an agreement, the punishment sentenced by the court below (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances admitted by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake, the Defendant can sufficiently recognize the fact that the victim was drunk and unable to resist, and that the victim committed indecent acts using such conditions.

The defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit.

1) The Defendant and the victim did not have any personal friendship with the Defendant and the victim before the instant case. The Defendant and the victim had a drinking place or had no drinking place prior to the instant case. However, the Defendant and the victim had a drinking place on September 1, 2015, which is on the day of the instant case. In other words, the Defendant and the victim got out of the country on August 2015, and decided to do so again on the instant day under the pretext of remanding the Defendant and H (victim’s superior) and the victim. However, the Defendant and the victim sent back a stop on the grounds of other commitments on the instant day. However, the Defendant and the victim sent back a drinking. 2) From around 19:10 to 230 minutes of meal at the Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Ewnding house, the Defendant and the victim divided the drinking and drinking water into 15 hours of drinking and drinking water for about 15 minutes of eating and drinking water without having to do so.

The amount of drinking that the defendant and the victim drink in the public uniform is considered to be normal in light of the empirical rule.