A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.

A. Defendant’s unreasonable sentencing: The lower court’s imprisonment (one year and six months) is too heavy.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (not guilty part in the grounds of appeal) caused by the crime of this case to the victim due to physical collision with the defendant in the course of resisting the victim to escape from the crime, which constitutes injury to the crime of injury resulting from rape. Moreover, the causal link between the crime of this case cannot be denied on the ground that the victim was treated due to symptoms, such as depression before the crime of this case, and stress disorder caused by the victim cannot be denied on the part of the victim. Nevertheless, the lower court determined that all injury inflicted on the victim cannot be recognized due to the crime of this case. This should be corrected on the basis of misconception of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles. 2) The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing is too somewhat somewhat somewhat somewhat somewhat somewhat somewhat less

2. Determination

A. The lower court, based on the following legal principles as indicated in its reasoning, determined as to whether the physical wife causing one victim to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles constitutes injury, and based on the following: (a) the victim’s statement on the part and degree of damage, the process of preparing the written diagnosis of injury to the victim, and the fact-finding statement on the victim’s intent prepared the written diagnosis of injury; and (b) the physical wife generated immediately after the instant crime was committed, which does not interfere with daily life even if the victim did not receive treatment, and thereby, changed the victim’s physical health to the extent that the victim’s physical condition was naturally cured due to the passage of the time, to the extent that it does not interfere with the daily life and that it could naturally be cured.

It was determined that it does not constitute a bodily injury resulting from rape because it is difficult to view it as a disability to the function of life.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.