A. In light of the facts and legal principles, the statements made by the investigative agency and the court of the court below in the victim's trial in a specific, consistent and reliable manner, and according to the victim's statement, the defendant could sufficiently be found to have committed an act of assaulting and threatening the victim to suppress the resistance and rape, but the court below acquitted the victim of any similar rape among the facts charged in this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (five million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the finding of guilt in a criminal trial should be based on evidence with probative value that leads a judge to have the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt of guilt against the defendant, the determination is inevitable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006). The lower court: (a) under the circumstances stated in its reasoning, i.e., ① the victim’s speech and behavior, such as the statement of paragraph (2) of the facts of the original trial, makes it impossible or considerably difficult to resist the victim’s speech and behavior meeting the requirement for establishing similar rape, or has

It is insufficient to view that the Defendant’s kneeing kneel and the Defendant’s keling-keling-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing-kneing

It cannot be determined, ② The Defendant and the victim are in dispute before and after the instant case.