The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable on the grounds of appeal.

2. It is recognized that the judgment of the defendant is divided into his mistake, and that the victim wants the defendant's wife.

However, the Defendant repeatedly committed the instant crime during the period of repeated crime, and the instant crime was committed by force by the Defendant, who is a de facto relative, and by deceptive means, committed the instant crime more than twice and thereby obstructing the police officer’s lawful performance of duties. The statutory punishment for the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes is more than five years. The lower court sentenced 2 years and six months to the maximum amount of imprisonment after the aggravation and aggravation of repeated crime and mitigation of amount of punishment. In addition, taking into account the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the foregoing assertion by the Defendant 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 grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 16 (2) main sentence of Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes). The "Article 21 (1) and Article 49 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes" of Article 25 (1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure is each clerical error of "Article 25 (1) of the Act on the Protection, etc. of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Crimes." Since it is obvious that the defendant's appeal is a clerical error, it is corrected or deleted in accordance with Article 25 (1) of the Rules on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.