A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

except that, for a period of four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. The sentence (3 years and six months of imprisonment, and 80 hours of order) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor explicitly withdraws unfair claims for exemption from disclosure disclosure order on the first trial date.

The sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. The crime of this case committed by the Defendant at a singing room operated by the victim who had been aware of his reputation, had the victimized person sleeped into the studio, had the victimized person sleeped into the studio, and had the injured person sleep, and had the injured person suffered the injury in the process of rape. The crime’s nature and method of crime is very poor, and the injured person appears to have suffered a severe mental shock and pain due to the crime of this case and suffered a sense of sexual humiliation, etc., which are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, when the defendant was in the first instance, the defendant recognized the crime of this case as well as reflects his mistake, and the defendant agreed with the victim in the first instance and did not want the punishment against the defendant, the degree of injury suffered by the victim is relatively excessive, and the defendant did not have any record of punishment exceeding the same crime or fine, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, all of the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, and the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court sentencing committee, it is recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's improper argument of sentencing is justified, and the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is without merit.