2. In a case where the appellate court did not change the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no change in the sentencing conditions in the appellate court compared to the lower court.

The circumstance favorable to the defendant is that the defendant appears to have committed the crime of this case, that the defendant paid money to the victim and expressed his intent that the victim would not be punished, and that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment in Korea, etc.

However, in light of the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the victim was drunk at the main place on the day of the instant crime, and the victim was raped by taking the victim into the dormitory of the company where the victim was her residing in the taxi stop after being drunk, taking advantage of the victim’s situation where he was unable to resist, and the background, content, result, etc. of the instant crime, and the victim suffered serious physical and mental shock and pain due to the instant crime, and other conditions of sentencing as indicated in the trial process, the lower court’s punishment goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, and cannot be deemed unreasonable.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is dismissed as there is no ground.