The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Rape 1) The Defendant is only a sexual intercourse under an agreement with the victim, and thus does not commit rape.

In addition, the Defendant did not exercise the force to make the victim’s resistance significantly difficult at the time of the sexual intercourse with the victim, and thus, there was assault and intimidation in the crime of rape.

It is also difficult to see it.

2) The Defendant, in violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (use and photographing such as cameras, etc.), took a photograph of sexual intercourse with the victim with the consent of the victim.

B. The reason for appeal argues that the Defendant’s ground for appeal was only based on mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, and only the date of the first trial of the first trial of January 17, 2018 when the deadline to submit a written reason for appeal passed. The argument that the sentencing was unfair is without legitimate ground for appeal, but it is to examine ex officio whether the sentencing was unfair or not.

The punishment (four years of imprisonment) imposed on the defendant by the court below is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) In determining the credibility of the victim’s statement in support of the facts charged, the court may assess the credibility of the statement in consideration of all the circumstances, including whether the content of the statement itself conforms to the rationality, logical inconsistency, or empirical rule, or conforms to the evidence or third party’s statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 2009). In a case where the victim’s statement is generally consistent and consistent with the facts charged, there are circumstances such as the victim’s statement on other minor matters are somewhat inconsistent.

Even if there is no other evidence that could objectively be deemed as having no credibility, it shall not be rejected without permission, unless it is objectively deemed as having been reliable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Do10728, Mar. 14, 2008). Meanwhile, the first instance court.