A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

However, this cannot serve as a legitimate ground for appeal since it was asserted after the lapse of the period for appeal, and even ex officio, it appears that the date, time, place, method, etc., to the extent that it can sufficiently distinguish the facts constituting the cause of the public prosecution from other facts (the defense counsel’s aforementioned assertion appears to the purport that “the public prosecution was instituted against the victim’s police statement,” and that the facts charged were not specified solely on such circumstance.

A. As to the charge of rape among the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges by misunderstanding the facts and misapprehending the legal doctrine, on the ground that there was no assault or intimidation against the victim, and there was no fact that the Defendant’s sexual organ was inserted into the victim’s sound book, and thus, did not have any credibility.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (three years of imprisonment, etc.) is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) Direct evidence of rape among the facts charged in the instant case is the only victim’s statement. As to this, the lower court, in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence adopted, i.e., (i) consistent and specific contents of the victim’s statement concerning the background of the crime or the form of specific act, and (ii) the contents of the voice file and the recording book recorded immediately after the crime conforms to the victim’s statement, it can be sufficiently reliable to the victim’s statement.

The decision was determined.

(ii)..