2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in cases where there exists no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The defendant appears in the attitude to recognize and reflect the crime of this case, and the defendant agreed with the victim at the investigation stage. However, the court below seems to have determined the sentence against the defendant in light of the above circumstances, and there is no change in circumstances to consider the sentencing after the sentence of the court below was sentenced; the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for two years and six years, and a suspended sentence for a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape, etc.); the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for a period of two years and four years on February 22, 2013; the records and circumstances of the crime of this case; or all the motive and scope of the crime of this case.

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.