The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal and the defense counsel withdrawn the argument of mental and physical weakness stated in the reasons for appeal on the date of the first trial of the court of first instance.

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles does not result from the act of the defendant, and the degree of injury of the victim is extremely minor and so there is no need for treatment, thus naturally healing and there is no obstacle in daily life. Thus, the injury does not constitute injury resulting from rape.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is extremely minor injury resulting from rape in a judgment of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles and thus there is no need for treatment, so it does not constitute injury to the crime of injury resulting from rape in a natural process. However, such grounds are premised on the fact that there is no assault or intimidation that may suppress the victim's resistance, or that it is the same degree as an injury that may normally occur in a sexual intercourse with an agreement, even though there is no assault or intimidation that may suppress the victim's resistance, and thus, if such an injury beyond the degree is caused by such violence or intimidation, it shall be deemed that the injury would be caused. Whether the victim's health condition is modified as bad and has caused an impediment to the function of life should not be determined uniformly, but rather, it should be determined based on the victim's age, gender, body, and mental specific condition (see Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do1039, May 26, 2005; 2003Do4636, Sept. 26, 2003).