The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for twelve years.

The defendant shall be 40 hours.

1. The lower court rendered a judgment of conviction on the part of the Defendant case, and rendered a judgment of dismissal of the prosecutor’s request regarding the part regarding which the request for attachment order was filed, and there is no benefit of appeal as to the part regarding which the request for attachment order was filed.

Therefore, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 9 (8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, the scope of trial of this court is limited to the part of the defendant's case among the judgment below, and the part of the request for attachment order is excluded from the scope of trial of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts 1) Articles 1, 3-2, 4-1, and 4-1 (a) and (d) of the facts constituting an offense in the judgment of the court below, the Defendant did not rape the victim or make indecent act by force as stated in this part of the facts charged. Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged by reliance on the victim’s statement that is not reliable, and thus, it erred in the misapprehension of facts in the judgment of the court below.

At the home of the victim, the defendant committed a similar act by promptly entering the victim's sexual organ with the victim's sexual organ, and recognized the fact that the mother of the victim was raped with the victim who was under influence of alcohol, but all this was in 2014.

Nevertheless, the lower court: (a) held that the time of committing the crime under paragraph (2) of the crime was 2012 and 3-A.

Since the time of crime in paragraph (1) was recognized differently from the fact in 2013, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The Defendant was suffering from depression before committing the instant crime, etc., but at the time of the instant crime, the Defendant was in a state that, at the time of the instant crime, he did not have the ability to discern or make decisions about the alcohol under the influence of taking the drug of depression.

C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (12 years of imprisonment) is too unlimited.