2. According to the records, although the Defendant was drinking at the time of committing the instant crime, considering various circumstances such as the background, means and method of the instant crime, and the Defendant’s act before and after committing the instant crime, which are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, it cannot be deemed that the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and thus, the lower court’s judgment is justifiable to the same purport.

Furthermore, examining the various sentencing conditions of the instant case, there are extenuating circumstances that are favorable to the Defendant, such as the confession of the instant criminal facts, the fact that the Defendant committed the instant criminal facts, the injury suffered by the victim due to the instant criminal acts, the fact that the Defendant’s family members agreed with the victim, the victim submitted the written application for the birth of the Defendant’s wife to this court, and the fact that the Defendant must support the elderly with poor body.

However, the crime of this case was committed by a defendant who was sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment by force on September 10, 2010 or 2 years of probation, and committed rape and bodily or mental harm in the course of committing the crime, which is very serious in quality of the crime. The victim appears to have suffered serious physical or mental harm due to the crime of this case, the court below sentenced the maximum punishment for which discretionary mitigation was made in consideration of the defendant's favorable circumstances, and other various sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, including the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, and after committing the crime, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

3...