2. The lower court sentenced the above punishment by taking account of the favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s previous records of violence several times, the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime during the repeated crime period, the Defendant’s reflectivity, and the victim’s refusal to want the Defendant’s punishment, respectively.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, health, circumstances leading to a crime, means and consequence, scale of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, other than the circumstances that take account of the aforementioned circumstances into account, as seen above, the lower court’s sentence appears to be reasonable, and the lower court’s judgment of sentencing exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion.

There is no circumstance that the assessment or maintenance thereof is deemed unfair (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the sentence imposed by the lower court is unfair because it is too unreasonable as the Defendant alleged.

3. In conclusion, 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.