A. The wife of a victim of misunderstanding of facts is extremely minor or naturally occurring in a sex relationship, and does not constitute injury resulting from rape.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (seven years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The Defendant asserted the same purport as this part of the grounds for appeal in the lower judgment, and the lower court rejected the above assertion on the ground that the Defendant’s wife suffered from the victim at the time of the instant crime constituted injury resulting from rape by clearly explaining the grounds for appeal in detail in the “judgment on the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion” under the written judgment of the lower court.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in comparison with the records of this case, the judgment of the court below is just, and there is no reasonable ground to deem that the ground explained by the court below was erroneous in the determination of evidence or that the argument leading to the fact-finding is in violation of logical and empirical rules, etc.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

나. 양형부당 주장에 대한 판단 원심은, 피고인이 이 사건 범행의 사실관계에 관하여는 자백하면서 자신의 잘못을 반성하고 있는 점, 이 사건 범행으로 피해자가 입은 상해는 비교적 경미해 보이는 점 등을 피고인에게 유리한 정상으로, 피고인이 한밤중에 길을 가던 피해자를 약 10m 가량 끌고 으슥한 폐건물로 이동하여 그곳에서 피해자를 강간하고 그 과정에서 상해를 입게 하였는바, 그 범행 수법과 내용이 매우 폭력적이라는 점에서 죄질이 매우 나쁜 점, 특히 이 사건 범행은 일면식도 없는 불특정인을 대상으로 한 범죄이고 단순히 우발적 범행이라고 보기도 어렵다는 점에 비추어 볼 때, 피고인의 범행은 공공의 불안을...