The sentence of the lower court (three years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

The grounds of appeal submitted by the defense counsel of the defendant cited the mistake of facts as the grounds of appeal, but the defendant and the defense counsel withdrawn the misconception of facts on the first trial date.

Judgment

In the past, the Defendant made a confession of the crime of this case, and made a mistake.

The crime of rape in the instant case was committed with multiple attempts.

The defendant seems to suffer from mental illness, such as depression and decentralization disorder.

Such circumstances can be considered in light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is very bad in the nature of the crime, since the defendant entered the victim's house to help the victim first, and attempted to rape, and the victim forcedly resists the victim to commit an attempted rape, and such crime is very bad.

The Defendant committed the instant crime even though he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment due to a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (obscenity using communications media).

The victim appears to have received a considerable sense of sexual humiliation and physical or mental impulse due to the crime of this case, and the defendant's severe punishment is desired.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

As well as these circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is not reasonable.