The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the above punishment for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant had no knife the knife against the victim.

The victim was threatened by the defendant while knife the victim at the stage of investigation.

Although it was stated in the court, it is true that the defendant was aware that he had a knife in the knife.

It was found that there was no intimidation.

The statements were reversed.

The above statements by the victim were due to the free will according to conscience, while the statements by the victim's investigative agencies were inconsistent and contradictory or exaggerated.

Nevertheless, the court below held that the statement of investigative agency is more reliable than the victim's legal statement.

In light of the facts charged, the charges were convicted.

2) The sentence imposed by the lower court corresponding to the actual crime committed by the Defendant by carefully determining the credibility of the statement by the victim of sentencing (a suspended sentence of two years in the period of imprisonment with prison labor for eight months) shall be mitigated.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing) committed the instant crime with heavy nature of the crime, the circumstance that the Defendant tried to reverse the victim’s statement when the Defendant was detained, and the Defendant abused the victim, as well as sending sexually related images to the Defendant and the women hedging.

In light of the fact that there are power, such as knife or knife, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of fact by asserting the same purport as the grounds for appeal on this part in the lower court’s judgment, and by explaining the Defendant’s assertion and its judgment. In other words, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court and the first instance court, namely, ① the Defendant’s intimidation the Defendant to the victim in a knife at home.