2. We examine the reasoning of appeal. The following facts are recognized as favorable to the Defendant: (a) the fact that the Defendant recognized the instant criminal facts and reflects his mistake; (b) the amount of damage is not so significant; and (c) the fact that the judgment of the lower court becomes final and conclusive and the fact that equity should be considered with respect to the judgment

However, in light of the contents and methods of the crime, etc., the crime of this case committed by the defendant is not less than the nature of the crime; it has not been completely restored to the victim's agreement or complete damage; the defendant has been punished several times due to the same kind of crime; considering the favorable circumstances of the defendant; it appears that the court below reduced the fine of 1.5 million won issued in the summary order in consideration of the favorable circumstances of the defendant; there is no special change in circumstances that can reduce the punishment of the court below; and there is no special change in circumstances that can reduce the punishment of the court below; the general punishment in the same and similar cases of the same kind and similar kind; balance between the punishment of the defendant, and other various circumstances that form the conditions for the punishment of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior, intelligence and environment; the motive and consequence of the crime of this case; the relation with the victim, means and consequence; the frequency of the crime; the circumstances after the crime, family relationship, health conditions, etc., the defendant's argument is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit and thus dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da14466, May 15, 2015). However, the last sentence of the judgment of the court below on the ground that it is obvious that the Defendant’s appeal is a clerical error in the name of “No. 15, 2015.”