As to the judgment of the court below on the ground of unreasonable sentencing, the part on the claim for attachment order among the judgment below does not have a benefit of appeal.

Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders is excluded from the scope of trial of this court, and thus, the scope of trial of this court is limited to the part of the accused case except for the part of the claim for attachment order among the judgment below.

2. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Since the investigation agency, the accused has been aware of the crime in a net manner, and is repented.

The victim does not want to be punished against the defendant by mutual consent with the victim.

However, the defendant intrudes on the new wall without permission into the victim's house, thereby putting the victim's fingers into the victim's resistance, thereby committing similar rape and committing a crime is not good (it cannot be deemed that the victim is a man with a sexual intercourse). As a result of the defendant's criminal act, the victim statements that he received serious mental impulse.

The Defendant, while serving as an officer in the military, was transferred to a military trial by committing a continuous and repeated sexual indecent act against subordinate soldiers while serving as an officer in the military, and was sentenced to three years of suspension of execution on September 17, 2018, and was under suspension of execution by being sentenced to three years of suspension of execution on September 17, 2018. However, the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of it.

The above factors of sentencing and the age of the defendant.