2. The lower court sentenced the Defendant to one year of imprisonment, taking into account the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant and favorable to the Defendant.

The judgment of the court below exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion when comprehensively taking into account the following: (a) the conditions for sentencing in the trial; and (b) the fact that no agreement has been reached with the victim until now; (c) the applicable sentences; and (d) the sentencing guidelines;

There is no circumstance that it is deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is or that the judgment of the court below is unfair.

In addition, even in full view of the circumstances and results of the instant crime, Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, etc., the sentence of the lower court is appropriate, and it is not deemed unfair because it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit.

However, the judgment below's three 16,17 conduct "Article 127 and attached Table 5 of the Enforcement Rule of the same Act" is obvious that it is a clerical error in Article 4 of the Regulations on Reporting and Disclosure at the time of the occurrence of an accident or breakdown in nuclear energy utilization facilities / [attached Table]. Thus, ex officio correction is made in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure.