The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of committing the crime, the Defendant was under the influence of alcohol and was in a state of mental disability or mental disability.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, and 80 hours of sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below as to the claim of mental disability, the defendant may recognize the fact of drinking to a certain extent at the time of committing the crime, but on the other hand, considering all the circumstances such as the defendant's speech and behavior shown at the time of committing the crime, the method of committing the crime and the circumstances after committing the crime, it cannot be deemed that the defendant has lost or weak ability to discern things or make decisions.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant's assertion.

B. It is true that there are favorable circumstances in determining punishment, such as the fact that the defendant recognized the facts charged and divided his mistake, that the victim does not want to punish the defendant, that the mother of the victim wants to maintain a marital relationship with the defendant, and that there are children to support the defendant under the chain of two persons, and that the defendant has no same criminal record.

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant’s forced sexual intercourse with the victim, she is under the influence of alcohol; (b) the nature of the crime is very poor; and (c) the mental impulse between the victim and his husband is very high due to the crime of this case; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and all other circumstances constituting the conditions of sentencing, such as circumstances after the crime, the punishment imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.