The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) In the case of a mistake of facts in violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, it cannot be deemed that there was an intentional indecent act by compulsion in view of the fact that the Defendant committed an act identical to that recorded in the facts charged, but was between the victim and the victim.

(2) In the case of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the Defendant did not enter the apartment of the victim for the purpose of rape.

B. Considering that the Defendant agreed on the assertion of unreasonable sentencing, the lower court’s imprisonment (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the record of a mistake of facts in violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Indecent Act by compulsion), it is recognized that there was an intentional indecent act by compulsion of the defendant, considering the following: (i) the victim was found to have committed an indecent act by the defendant: (a) the victim was unable to do so by clearly expressing his/her intention to refuse to commit an indecent act; (b) the defendant also recognized that “if the victim expressed his/her intention to refuse and refuse to do so; and (c) the victim’s chest was delivered with his/her chest, he/she would have inflicted his/her hand.” (iv) The defendant was found to have committed an intentional indecent act by compulsion of the defendant, in full view of the following: (i) the victim was under 17 years of age at the time of the crime of this case, and there was no other person having sexual intercourse with him/her.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

(2) According to the record of the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the following facts are acknowledged: (i) at the time, the Defendant, in his apartment house, had the victim undergo continuing to do so in order to have sexual intercourse with the victim by making the victim belonging to the Defendant and another male. (ii) At the time, the Defendant would be able to do so.