A. Error 1) On July 25, 2013, the Defendant had sexual intercourse under an agreement with the victim. 2) On July 31, 2013, the Defendant entered the victim’s residence with the consent of the victim and attempted to have sexual intercourse with the victim at the time. However, there was no intention to rape.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, 80 hours of order to complete sexual assault treatment programs, and 5 years of order of disclosure and notification) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. 1) The victim was present as a witness at the trial of the court in order to the effect that “Around July 25, 2013, the defendant tried to have a sexual intercourse with the victim and suspended the victim’s refusal. On July 31, 2013, the victim was forced to have a sexual intercourse with the victim, and the victim was forced to have a sexual intercourse with the victim and stopped the victim’s right of resistance.”

B. However, in light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the records of meetings between the defendant, victim, F who is the defendant's living together, and G who is the defendant's seat, etc., the victim's statement at the court below is not only against the victim's investigative agency's statement, but also partly inconsistent with the defendant's defense. The defendant asked that they should reverse the victim's statement at several meetings with F and G after the decision of the court below. The victim's statement at the investigative agency corresponding to each of the facts charged in this case is consistent and very specific, and the defendant also recognized each of the facts charged in the above facts charged at the investigative agency and the court below, it is credibility in the statement at the investigative agency of the victim's investigative agency corresponding to each of the facts charged in this case, and contrary thereto.