2. The Defendant: (a) committed sexual intercourse and indecent act by force against the victim E, who is a foreign worker under his/her direction and supervision; (b) committed assault on the ground that he/she did not properly hear his/her speech; and (c) embezzled the business property to be divided into the victim F.

The Defendant, prior to the instant crime, has no record of committing the same kind of crime, and there are circumstances to take into account the circumstances, such as the fact that he has recognized all of his criminal acts and committed a mistake.

However, in light of the fact that the crime against the victim E committed by taking advantage of the Defendant’s superior position and the contents of the crime seems to have been significant and considerable physical and mental suffering suffered by the victim E due to the crime, and that the victim did not make any effort to recover damage to the victim even though the amount of damage caused by the embezzlement is not significant, the Defendant’s liability may not be strictly charged.

In full view of all the circumstances, including these circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and motive, means and consequence of each of the instant crimes, etc., the lower court’s sentence is deemed to fall under the scope of the appropriate sentence corresponding to its liability, and it does not seem that the sentence is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted.

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