The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 120 hours.

In light of the circumstance and attitude of the victim who misleads the gist of the grounds for appeal, the statement of F and G, and the actions of the victim revealed in CCTV images, etc., the Defendant is highly likely to have sexual intercourse with the victim under the victim’s implied consent, and the Defendant’s assault by the victim inflicted injury on the left side of the victim.

It is also difficult to see it.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the grounds of the statement of the victim without credibility is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and affected the judgment.

At the time of the instant crime, the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, had weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (five years of imprisonment, 120 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

Although there are special circumstances under which the court below ordered the disclosure and notification of personal information for a period of five years, it is illegal that the court below ordered the disclosure and notification of personal information to the defendant who was improper to order the disclosure and notification of personal information.

Judgment

As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant argued that this part of the appeal was similar to the grounds for appeal, and the lower court, upon examination of the victim’s witness, etc., is consistent with the circumstances at the time of the sales, that is, in the case of the victim’s statement that conforms to the facts charged, specific and alternative, and whether the Defendant called the victim F after ten minutes after entering the D.

In line with the circumstances described above, F, in the first investigation and court of the court below, stated that the victim was cut to the extent of 3 times the name of F in the first investigation and court of the court below. This is consistent with the statement of the victim that the defendant put his finger into the victim and prevented the Defendant from passing the sound. However, F or G is in line with the statement of the victim that the victim was unable to pass the sound.