2. Determination factors are recognized as favorable sentencing factors, such as the fact that the defendant recognized his own crime and was treated as the neutism and alcohol dependence symptoms, and that most of the victims of the instant fraud were agreed upon.

However, the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim who has been unable to resist in drinking twice, and caused injury to the victim such as sexual intercourse. The crime is very poor, due to the crime of quasi-rape in this case, the victim seems to have been seriously suffering from mental suffering, and even though it seems that the victim has not yet received a letter of apology, the victim has been punished several times due to the fraud without paying the drinking value, and even if he has been punished several times due to such frauds without paying the drinking value, there is a high possibility of criticism.

In full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, the motive and background leading to the instant crime, the means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the sentence sentenced by the first instance court is deemed appropriate, and it is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.