The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, on the day of the instant case, was aware of the fact that he had a sexual intercourse under the agreement between the victim and the her mother on the day of the instant case. However, the Defendant was refused to demand a sexual intercourse with the victim, and the Defendant was refused to demand a sexual intercourse with the victim, and there was no fact that the Defendant led the victim to suppression of resistance and suppression of resistance, and did not inflict injury on the victim.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court, including the victim, when the statement made by the witness is mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it shall not be rejected without permission, unless there exists any separate evidence to deem such credibility objectively acceptable (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012). In light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous or, in light of the following special circumstances, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court, and the result of additional examination conducted by the time of the first instance examination and the closing of arguments in the appellate court, the lower court, as an appellate court, should have determined the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance court without permission.