A. 1) Although there was an indecent act by force by the Defendant, such as misunderstanding of facts, etc., the Defendant attempted to rape with the intent to rape.

2) The injured party’s wound does not constitute injury under the Criminal Act, such as where there is no need to treat the injured party with extremely minor treatment and there is no impediment to natural therapy and daily life.

3) Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds of the victim’s statement, etc. without credibility. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B. Improper sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable (the Defendant’s defense counsel asserted that the lower court erred by failing to reduce attempted rape even if the Defendant committed a crime of intrusion upon residence of this case on the first trial date after the filing period for the appeal was based on the grounds for appeal, but such circumstance alone has grounds for appeal, such as the allegation.

In addition, according to Article 8 (1) of the Punishment of Sexual Crimes Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do88, May 31, 2007) and Article 8 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter referred to as the "Assault Punishment Act"), the crime of intrusion upon residence is established if the victim suffered an injury due to his/her negligence even though not only the person who committed the crime of rape upon residence under Article 3 (1) of the Punishment of Sexual Crimes Act, but also the person who committed the crime of rape upon residence, but also committed the crime of intrusion upon residence, and Article 8 (1) of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act of Article 15 of the Punishment of Sexual Violence Act of 208 applies to the case where the person who committed or attempted the crime of rape upon residence was committed with the victim's intentional intent to inflict an injury on the victim (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do1382, Apr. 24, 2008).