The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, for a period of three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (two years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. Defendant 1) The lower court erred by misapprehending the facts as to the credibility of the victim’s statement

After determining this, I convicted the charged facts of this case as evidence.

However, the statements of the victim are not consistent with the place of crime, the circumstances of the case, etc., and there is no credibility due to lack of specific and detailed information.

The court below erred by misapprehending the facts based on the statements of the victim with no credibility, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts

A. The judgment of the court below held that the victim's statement that the victim was forced to commit an indecent act by the defendant, such as the victim's statement in the investigative agency and the court of the court below are reliable, consistent with the witness's statement that could not have been made if the victim's statement in the investigative agency and the court of the court below were consistent, and it is admitted as evidence that the facts charged in this case

The decision was determined.

B. In determining the credibility of a victim’s statement, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court below’s judgment, as well as whether the contents of the statement conform to the rationality of the victim’s statement itself or the empirical rule, or conforms to the witness evidence or third party’s statement, as well as whether it conforms to the witness’s statement in the open court after being sworn before a judge, such as the appearance and attitude of the witness, and the pencing of the statement, which are difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, should consider all the circumstances that are difficult to record. In a case where the victim’s statement as well as the witness’s statement conforms to the facts charged, it should not be rejected without permission unless there is any separate evidence to deem the credibility objectively acceptable (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da1548, May