All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing) mistake of fact (in relation to forced indecent act, the Defendant submitted to the court on November 10, 2017, a document claiming a mistake of fact as to the charge of interfering with business and obstructing the performance of official duties among the facts charged in the instant case. However, this cannot be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal since it was submitted after the appeal period as prescribed in Article 361-3(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was not timely filed).

The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the above victim on the ground that there was no fact that the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim on the ground that the Defendant did not have a strong shoulder of the victim D (at the investigative agency and the court of the court below stated that the Defendant had a strong shoulder of the above victim at the court of the court below, but this stated to the effect that the Defendant made a false statement with the police’s illegal confinement and the erroneous solicitation around the police). 2) The lower court’s punishment (4 million won of punishment, and 40 hours of sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing)’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

가. 피고인의 사실 오인 주장에 관하여 원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거들에 의하여 알 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정들, 즉 ① 피해자 D은 ‘ 피고인이 등 뒤로 다가와 갑자기 양손으로 어깨를 만졌고, 단순히 툭 친 것이 아니라 어깨 맨살을 양손으로 만졌다’ 는 취지로 구체적으로 명확히 진술한 점, ② 당시 현장에 있던

E Also, the Defendant made a statement to the extent of four customers, which supported the victim’s statement, and the Defendant: (a) acknowledged the fact that the Defendant contacted the said victim’s shoulder at the court of the lower court, and (b) acknowledged the fact that the Defendant had contacted the said victim’s shoulder; (c) did not err in the process of making a statement at the court of the lower court.

In light of the above, the lower court’s judgment that found the Defendant guilty of the Defendant’s forced indecent act is justifiable.

Therefore, this part.