The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, by mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal principle, only stated in paragraph (1) of the facts charged, has disseminated the victim once, but did not have any fact of suffering or harming the victim.

On the date and time stated in paragraph (2) of the facts charged, the defendant only met once as the victim was fluent, and there was no fact that the victim's chest was fluent.

The defendant's interview of the victim with the victim did not go against the victim's will.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, two years of community service order, 200 hours of community service order, 40 hours of attending lecture for sexual assault treatment, 3 years of employment restriction order) is too unreasonable.

2. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal doctrine are observed. In so doing, the lower court can find the fact that the Defendant committed indecent act by force as stated in the facts charged.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

The victim made a very consistent and concrete statement about the main part of the facts charged in the investigation agency and the court of original instance.

B. The Defendant also recognized the fact that he had physical contact with the victim, such as protecting the victim on the date and time set forth in paragraph (1) of the facts charged from the investigative agency to the court of the trial at the court of the trial at the same time as stated in paragraph (2) of the facts charged.

The Defendant asserted that he did not go against the will of the victim to talk about the part of the victim on the date and time stated in Paragraph (2) of the facts charged. However, the Defendant stated in an investigative agency that “the victim refused to do kis to the effect that kisc is kiscing the victim, and kiscing the victim again.” The Defendant agreed that the victim who refused to meet the requirement was only the negative part of the victim.”

It is recognized that the defendant was a situation that could be mistaken for it.