The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

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

(b) the defendant;

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 피고인 겸 피부착명령청구자(이하 ‘피고인’이라고만 한다) 1) 피고사건 부분 가) 원심 범죄사실 제3항 기재 강제추행상해 부분 - 법리오해 피해자의 진술에 의하더라도 피고인이 피해자의 머리를 잡아 넘어뜨린 사실은 있지만 피해자의 등을 밟았는지 배를 찼는지 불분명하여 상해 부위가 명확하지 않고, 피해자가 입은 상처가 별다른 진료나 투약 없이 저절로 치유된 것을 보면, 피해자가 입은 상처는 극히 경미하여 강제추행상해죄에 있어서의 상해에 해당한다고 볼 수 없다.

Even if the injured party's wife's injury is recognized, the act of indecent act by compulsion has already been terminated in a car and thereafter, the assault that the defendant gets off the victim's head and incurred after the victim coming out of the car, so a separate crime of indecent act by indecent act by indecent act is established since it does not cause an injury to the "opportun" of indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act.

Therefore, the part of the charge of indecent act by compulsion is established only for the crime of indecent act by compulsion. Since the victim clearly expresses his intention that he does not want to punish the defendant during the trial of the court below, it is necessary to dismiss the prosecution.

Nevertheless, the court below found the victim's status as an injury in the crime of indecent act by compulsion, and found the victim's opportunity to commit indecent act by compulsion and found the victim guilty of the part of the charge of indecent act by indecent act by compulsion. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on injury in the crime of indecent act by indecent act by compulsion

B. The offense of confinement and the offense of indecent act by compulsion is in an ordinary competition relationship, since the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principle, detained the victim for the purpose of indecent act by compulsion as stated in the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment, and the injury by indecent act stipulated in paragraph (3)

However, the court below held the above two.