The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment, and 40 hours of orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable in light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case.

2. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the part of the Defendant case, the Defendant attempted to rape the victim under the influence of alcohol, who was under the age of 18, who was working as a training staff at the U.S. heading of the U.S. as a senior vice president, instead of protecting the victim, and attempted to commit rape. Accordingly, the victim appears to have received a considerable physical and mental shock, and the victim’s male-parent body found the place of crime at the end of tracking the victim’s whereabouts along with the police through tracking the location of the cell phone location, and found the victim’s location at the end of tracking the victim’s whereabouts. As such, the rape of the instant case was committed in the attempted crime, and the degree of illegality or criticism of the act was not sufficient.

However, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant, when committing the instant crime, appears to reflect his mistake in depth; (b) there is a disability of class 3 of the respiratory disorder; (c) the Defendant was punished by a fine or has no criminal power for the same kind of crime; (d) the Defendant appears to have caused the instant crime by somewhat contingent and contingently with the victim while under the influence of alcohol together with the victim; (c) in particular, the Defendant agreed with the victim when he was under the influence of alcohol; and (d) other factors of sentencing as indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, and circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, the Defendant’s sentence imposed by

Therefore, the defendant's ground of appeal disputing unfair sentencing is with merit.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the defendant's appeal is with merit.

[Grounds for the new judgment] criminal facts and facts of the crime.