In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

A. Part 1 of the defendant's case is erroneous (section 1 of the Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof). The defendant and the person requesting an attachment order (hereinafter "defendant").

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (10 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and is so unreasonable that it is too unreasonable for the lower court to have committed a sexual intercourse under the agreement with the victim on the date and time stated in this part of the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s attachment order against the Defendant on the part of the claim for attachment order is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in the lower court, and the lower court determined that, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant could have sufficiently recognized the fact that the Defendant took cash by threatening the victim with the kitchen knife as indicated in this part of the facts charged, and rape the victim.

(1) At the time of the instant case from the police to the court below’s trial, the victim made a consistent statement concerning the following: (a) the Defendant, carrying a kitchen knife, threatening the victim; and (b) the circumstances leading to rape of the victim; (c) the victim’s speech and behavior; (d) the methods of resistance from the victim; and (e) the developments leading to the investigation after

The victim's statements are very concrete, and there are many difficulties in making statements if those who did not directly experience due to nature. Unlike the defendant's assertion, there are no unreasonable or contradictory parts of the statement itself.

In addition, the victim's attitude to make a statement in the court of the court below is also serious, and it does not seem that the victim took a false care of without experiencing the above contents, and otherwise, the victim is the defendant.