The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the court below is just in finding the defendant guilty of the charge of rape, inducement of sexual intercourse, and attempted sexual intercourse among the charges of this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the degree of assault and intimidation in the crime of rape by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

In addition, we cannot accept the allegation of the grounds of appeal to the effect that it violates the principle of equality under the Constitution and the principle of clarity of the criminal justice, etc. to interpret the crime of attracting sexual intercourse under Article 288 (1) of the Criminal Act by including the "purpose of inter-party sexual intercourse" in the "purpose of sexual intercourse" in the crime of attracting sexual intercourse.

Meanwhile, pursuant to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a more minor sentence is imposed against the Defendant, the argument that the Defendant’s punishment is too unreasonable is not a legitimate appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.