2. The Defendant clearly perceived the fact that the Defendant’s tangible power used in the course of committing the crime is relatively less severe, and that he/she has a sexual relationship by force.

In addition, there are more favorable factors for sentencing, such as the fact that it seems to lead to a crime with dolusent perception than that, the fact that there is no history of criminal punishment, the fact that there is a age that has become an adult of the side without criminal punishment, and that there is a possibility of penization and edification, and that it is recognized that there is a favorable factor for sentencing, such as the fact that one's mistake is divided, and that considerable money is deposited for the victim.

However, the defendant first sexual intercourse with female juveniles over several occasions by force, and during that process, the defendant made a great sense of sexual humiliation to the victim through dynamic actions such as using self-defense organizations or photographing video images, and the victim and his family members are suffering from serious mental pain, and the victim and their family members still want to be punished against the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing, Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive and background leading to the instant crime, the means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence sentenced by the first instance court is deemed appropriate.

Therefore, the above argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

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

However, the rules on criminal procedure.