2. The Defendant: (a) raped the victim, who is the spouse of the private sector system, on two occasions; and (b) recognized an unfavorable sentencing factor, such as the fact that the content of the crime is anti-ethic and very poor; and (c) the victim appears to have obtained a considerable physical and mental impulse due to the instant crime.

However, it is also recognized that there are more favorable factors of sentencing, such as the fact that the defendant recognizes his own crime and is against his own will, the victim cancels the complaint against the defendant by mutual consent with the victim, and the fact that there has been no record of punishment before the crime was committed.

In full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing and the 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 other circumstances revealed in the pleadings, the sentence sentenced by the first instance court is deemed appropriate, and it is deemed unreasonable because it is too uneasible.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor'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.

(However, since it is obvious that the "No. 33" of the second letter 21 of the judgment of the court of first instance is a clerical error in the "No. 3", it shall be corrected in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.