2. The judgment defendant recognized the crime of this case and repented in depth.

It does not seem that the defendant's coerciond or threatened the victim at the time of committing the crime.

Since 1989, the defendant has been living without criminal punishment and has no criminal record of the same kind.

It seems that the social relationship of the defendant seems relatively clear.

However, the crime of this case is committed by force by force of the victim under the age of 13 by means of the victim's kisk while living in neighboring areas at the time when the victim is seven years of age, nine years of age and 12 years of age, and the defendant kiscing the victim's entrance, kiscing the victim's kisscing, exposing the chest, kiscing the chest, etc.

The victim appears to have suffered a considerable mental impulse due to the crime of this case and caused a sense of sexual shame, and seems to have been adversely affected to form a sound sexual identity or values.

Until the trial, the defendant received a letter from the victim or did not reach an agreement.

In addition, considering the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, and the range of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines, the punishment sentenced by the court below cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too appropriate and too unreasonable.

3. As such, 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.