2. A favorable circumstance is that the Defendant recognized the instant crime and reflects the fact that there is no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, and that the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime by contingency while under the influence of somewhat under the influence of alcohol.

However, there are no records of punishment for about 20 times due to the crime of this type (amount of punishment, suspension of execution, and punishment), the fact that the crime of this case was committed again during the period of repeated crime, and the fact that the victim did not agree with the victim and that the measures for recovery of damage were not taken properly.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence, there is no special change in circumstances that make the sentence different from the original court’s sentencing conditions indicated in the records of this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

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.