2. The lower court appears to have sentenced the Defendant to punishment by taking into account the favorable and unfavorable circumstances of the Defendant.

The Defendant deposited one million won to the victim D in the first instance, and partly repaid the damage, but only that part of the payment was made to compensate the victim for the damage properly.

Considering that it is difficult to see the fact that the above victim did not want the punishment of the defendant, the circumstances favorable to the defendant should be considered, but the degree of such consideration should be limited.

In full view of the aforementioned factors, including both the motive, circumstance, and consequence of the commission of the crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, the record of punishment, etc., as well as the conditions of the sentencing, the statutory penalty, and the sentencing guidelines, the lower court’s judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

There is no special circumstance that it is deemed unfair to maintain the judgment of the court below as it is, nor there is no special circumstance.

Therefore, the defendant's double punishment cannot be accepted.

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.