2. It is recognized that there are favorable sentencing factors such as the defendant's recognition of the crime of this case, the fact that the rape was committed in parallel, the fact that he voluntarily surrendered to the police, the fact that he voluntarily surrenders to the police, a fine of KRW 300,000 as a crime of violating the Military Service Act in around 2003, and the fact that there was no record of punishment other than a fine of KRW 1.5 million as a crime of violating the Road Traffic Act in around 2005.

However, while the Defendant was obscenity, the Defendant tried to listen to the sound of the victim's corridor and to attract the victim to his house and rape the victim. It is also recognized that there is a disadvantageous sentencing factor such as interview and crime quality, even though the victim suffered a big mental pain due to the crime in this case, the victim has not yet received a letter from the victim.

In full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, criminal records, motive and background leading to the instant crime, means and consequence of the instant crime, and various circumstances revealed in pleadings, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentence sentenced by the first instance court is deemed appropriate, and it 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 ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.