2. The following facts are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the mistake; (b) the Defendant did not want the punishment of the Defendant; and (c) the Defendant did not result in the occurrence of the consequence that the Defendant would be subject to actual criminal punishment due to the instant crime.

On the other hand, the crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case with false accusation against the victim as a false fact of special larceny and intimidation. The crime of false accusation is a crime that infringes on the state's criminal justice function and lacks the risk of illegal punishment. It is necessary to strictly punish the defendant. The defendant already committed the crime of this case without being aware of the fact that he had the history of criminal punishment for 11 times including suspended execution, even though he had already been subject to criminal punishment.

In full view of the above circumstances and other factors of sentencing, including the background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable as it is too unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s 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 grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.