The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., the fact that the Defendant is seriously against his fault, that is the primary offender, and that social ties are clear, the punishment imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate court should respect it.

(see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The Defendant posted on an Internet site a letter with anti-human and obscene contents together with pictures, and taken a female’s body seven times against his/her will, and the nature of the crime is not very good.

The victim J, who was exposed to the personal injury without any error as a result of the defendant's crime, suffered serious damage to the personal injury.

There are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that can be newly considered in sentencing in the trial.

In addition, considering the various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and background of the offense, and circumstances after the offense, etc., the sentencing of the lower court does not seem to be unreasonable because it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, even if considering the various circumstances asserted as grounds for appeal by the Defendant.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant'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.