2. It is recognized that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and reflects the fact that the defendant previously was punished for the same kind of crime or has no record of being sentenced to suspended execution or heavier punishment, the defendant is physically disabled, has family members to support, and is faced with economic difficulties.

However, the crime of this case is not appropriate and unfair in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s act of committing the crime of this case, such as threatening the victim and F to the effect that the victim and F came to know of the fact that he administered a phiphone and had sexual intercourse; (b) inducing F to believe that he was raped by the victim D; and (c) inducing F to commit the crime of this case, such as intimidation and in light of the content of intimidation, leading to the crime, background leading to the crime, and relation with the victim; and (c) threatening a female who lacks intellectual ability in the course of the crime to be punished if he is true and true; (d) the crime of false accusation is an active violation of the State’s criminal justice function; and (e) there is a need to punish the other party as a crime of causing danger of unfair criminal punishment; and (e) taking into account all other circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the records, such as age, environment, occupation, family relationship, circumstances leading to the crime of this case, and circumstances after the crime.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal of this case is reasonable, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.