Therefore, there are circumstances such as the following: (a) the Defendant appears to have reached a contingent crime under the influence of alcohol; (b) the crime of rape itself committed by the basic criminal of this case was attempted; (c) the degree of injury to the victim was not much serious; and (d) the Defendant is in depth divided into his mistake.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant who intrudes on the residence of the victim and tried to commit rape by assaulting the victim, and the contents of the crime are very serious.

The victim is suffering from heavy physical and mental pain due to the crime of this case, and the victim complains of difficulties such as falling short of little anxiety in daily life in his own dwelling, which must be the most peaceful due to the shock, and the result of the crime cannot be said to be light.

In particular, the crime of this case was committed among the victims' children, and the victims' children were also suffering from a huge mental impulse.

In full view of such circumstances as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, all the circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing, including the circumstances after the instant crime, and the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines (three to nine years of imprisonment), the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed to fall within the appropriate range of sentence corresponding to its responsibility.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.