The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not commit an indecent act by force against the victim.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged and erred by mistake of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (the amount of KRW 5 million, the amount of KRW 40 million, and the amount of KRW 40,000) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

Article 56(1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018; Article 56(1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which uniformly provides for the restriction on employment of children and juveniles-related institutions, etc. for a period of ten years for each defendant of the case, taking into account the seriousness of the crime and the risk of recidivism, etc., upon sentencing the punishment for each sex offense, the court shall set a differential period of employment within the scope of ten years for each defendant of the case. Article 3 of the Addenda to the above Act provides that Article 56 of the Act shall apply to persons who committed a sex offense before July 17, 2018, which is the date the above Act enters into force, and thus, the above amended Act shall also apply to this case.

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for reversal of authority, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and we will examine below.

3. The Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s allegation while explaining detailed circumstances.

In full view of the following circumstances found by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, the judgment of the court below is just and the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

(1) A defendant;