2. The judgment of the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects the depth thereof, and there are favorable circumstances such as the fact that the defendant agreed smoothly by the victim of the crime of this case and the investigative agency, and that the family members of the defendant want to take the seat of the defendant, and are conducting guidance and edification in the future.

However, the defendant was sentenced to a 4-year imprisonment for a crime of intrusion upon residence and rape in the previous trial and appealed from the appellate court on June 7, 2013. The defendant committed the crime of this case again because it was not less than 8 months after being sentenced to a suspended sentence (3 years of imprisonment and 5 years of suspended sentence) on June 7, 2013. The previous crime of this case committed a sex crime by intrusion upon a female victim's residence in the middle of stud-populated area. The crime of this case was also more poor than the crime of this case was committed in a similar way at a place that is not far away from the previous place of crime. There is no special circumstance or change that is newly considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the judgment of the court below. In full view of all the circumstances, such as the defendant's character and behavior, environment, relationship with the victim, motive and consequence of the crime of this case, situation and result of the crime, the previous suspended sentence becomes void and the record, etc., the judgment of the court below is proper.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.