2. The lower court determined the sentence by taking into account the following circumstances as revealed in the lower judgment’s “reasons for sentencing”.

The defendant committed a crime while being sentenced to a concurrent crime due to a crime committed for the same kind of crime as the victim in favor of the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant is recognized as committing a crime and is against the wrong fact, and that the victim has agreed with the victim, and thus, the crime has been committed. Therefore, the nature of the crime is very poor, such as the fact that the damage was serious, and all other circumstances unfavorable to the defendant such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct, motive, means and consequence, the circumstances after the crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions specified in the records and the theory of changes, shall be determined as ordered by the sentence.

However, the court below seems to have determined an appropriate punishment by taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant and unfavorable circumstances, and the crime of this case is deemed to have inflicted injury on the victim, who is an inmate, while the defendant was detained in prison, which is a correctional institution, and this may have a serious impact on the order of confinement and correctional services in prison, and the nature of the crime is not good, and it does not seem that the court below’s sentence against the defendant is too unreasonable, considering the conditions of sentencing specified in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant’s age, sexual behavior, and environment.

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.