The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In a case where the Defendant, as stated in the facts charged, took the back of the victim’s back by hand as he did, was ordered by the Defendant to use the victim’s force in the process of speaking the victim while the Defendant was fluor between the Defendant’s will and the victim’s sexual intercourse, so insofar as there was no subjective motive or purpose, such as inducing sexual desire, the crime of indecent act by force is not established.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of facts, the following facts should be determined carefully by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, the relationship before the offender and the victim, circumstances leading to the act, specific manner leading to the act, and the sexual morality of the age, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2417, Apr. 26, 2002; 201Do3893, Jun. 14, 2012). Moreover, the victim’s primary motive or objective was not required to have the victim lawfully meet the victim’s sexual desire as a subjective constituent element necessary for the establishment of forced indecent act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do2417, Apr. 26, 2002; 2012Do3893, Jun. 14, 2012). The victim was a male police officer’s sexual desire at the time of being called out to the victim and the victim’s victim’s first stage.