The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

However, the period of three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant (unfair sentencing) and his defense counsel initially asserted that the Defendant entered the victim's residence by chance in order to see the victim's hosa in the way that the Defendant had a sense of hosium, and that the victim tried to see the sound immediately, but the victim attempted to see the sound as soon as possible. However, the victim followed the Defendant's arm's length and shoulder, and did not commit an indecent act by force the victim. However, the Defendant respondeded on the fourth public trial date of the first public trial.

Even if ex officio, the defendant and his defense counsel asserted the same purport in the court below, and the court below rejected such assertion in detail under the title "the judgment on the defendant and his defense counsel's assertion" (3-5 pages of the court below's judgment). If we closely compare the judgment of the court below with the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is an error by mistake of fact.

subsection (b) of this section.

The sentence of the lower court (a three-year imprisonment, a forty-hour order to complete a sexual assault treatment lecture) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (misunderstanding of the legal principles and the part not guilty) argued unfair sentencing as to the guilty portion at the first trial date of the first trial of the court below, but this is only asserted after the lapse of the submission period of the reasons for appeal, and thus, it cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.

The Defendant intrudes upon the victim’s residence for sexual purposes, and from the perspective of the victim or the general public, the Defendant’s act of exposing a female man’s house into the victim’s house, thereby making the hand or the part of the arms per se, and causing a sense of sexual humiliation.

However, the court below ruled against the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act by Forced Intrusion on Residence) due to forced indecent acts.