A. Comprehensively taking account of the background leading up to the crime of mistake of facts (Dismissal of prosecution) and the statement made by the Defendant and the victim, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant carried over excessive charges, which are dangerous objects, on June 8, 2013, during the time and incompetence of the victim’s resistance, and committed rape after suppressing the victim’s resistance.

B. Considering the overall circumstances on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the lower court’s imprisonment (three years of imprisonment and five years of suspended sentence) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Article 3(1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act provides that the phrase “any dangerous object or any deadly weapon” is widely used as well as possession.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Do2812 Decided September 6, 2002, etc.). In the instant case, examining whether there was an excessive degree, the victim stated at an investigative agency that “if the Defendant is memoryed that there was a knife, it may be said that it would be said that the Defendant would have been knife.” while stating at the investigative agency that “I need to be said that there was a little number of knife that it was difficult for the Defendant to knife at the night, and that it was difficult for him to look at a book, or a knife at a place that could be seen as a knife, instead of a book, or a knife,” it is not clear whether there was an excessive excess on the knife on the knife in fact.”

Furthermore, according to whether the Defendant has threatened the victim's resistance, the Defendant stated to the effect that he did not have any intention to use it, such as, “I would not have threatened or threatened with knife” with respect to this part of the crime, and “I would not have knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife n

Furthermore, on June 8, 2013, the victim was also threatened by the defendant's knife.