The second original judgment (2013Gohap75) shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

information about the defendant for five years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Ground of appeal against the first judgment of the court below 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles or a person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter “defendant”)

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (five years of imprisonment) cannot be deemed to have commenced the commission of rape, and the victim’s result is not by assault for the purpose of rape, and thus does not constitute the crime of rape injury.

B. The reasoning for appeal against the second judgment of the court below (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On the grounds of appeal of the first instance judgment, the part concerning the defendant's case ① examined the judgment of misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, and the part concerning the crime of rape should be deemed to have commenced when the victim's resistance is impossible or when the victim commences assault or intimidation to the extent that it is considerably difficult to resist or make it difficult to resist. In fact, the victim's resistance is not likely to be impossible or considerably difficult due to such assault or intimidation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Do1253, Jun. 9, 200). Even though rape did not constitute attempted rape or the result of sexual intercourse, the crime of injury to the victim is established if the victim suffered injury, and the result of the injury to rape was committed not only by assault used as a means of rape, but also by assault or intimidation from the victim's own act of rape, it does not necessarily mean that the defendant and the defense counsel did not lawfully commence rape and did not establish the crime of rape in this case for the purpose of adopting it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 99Do599.