The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) falsely misunderstanding the fact that the Defendant would leave the victim G in his house, leaving the victim G, and then leaving the mixed telecom to the mixed telecom.

In other words, G misunderstanding misunderstandings with horses, and G ring cans in a vehicle.

On the other hand, after stopping a car at the time of locking the car, the first chair who was seated by G was cut down in the future, and then was pushed down behind it, and the Defendant’s arms did not fit the left part of G with G’s chest or with his hand.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the charge of the instant forced indecent act on the sole basis of the testimony of G without credibility, thereby erroneous.

(2) misunderstanding of the legal principles, even if the Defendant’s arms were cut off with G’s clothes, and the Defendant’s arms contacted G’s body, the above act by the Defendant’s above does not constitute assault or intimidation in the crime of indecent conduct or indecent conduct.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on forced indecent acts by recognizing the Defendant’s above act as an indecent act.

(3) In light of the fact that the defendant works in good faith as a social worker, where the sentence of the court below is finalized, the defendant is more difficult to work as a social worker, the degree of conduct is insignificant, the injured person expressed his/her intention that he/she would not want the punishment of the defendant, and the defendant has no record of criminal punishment other than a fine imposed once, the sentence of the court below which sentenced the order to complete the sexual assault treatment program for a fine of 2 million won and 20 hours is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (1) misunderstanding the facts (the acquittal part of the judgment of the court below) , which is the premise for the application of the above dmark formula, is written to the defendant's investigative agency.