The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (two years of imprisonment with prison labor for one year suspension, two years of protection observation, 80 hours of community service, and 40 hours of violent therapy lectures) is too unreasonable.

2. It is recognized that the judgment defendant led to the confession of the crime and repented his mistake.

However, considering the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the instant offenses, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant has been punished on 27 occasions; (b) there was a history of having been punished several occasions for violent crimes; (c) the Defendant did not recover from damage; (d) the victim failed to agree with the victim; and (e) the victim wanted to repeat the Defendant’s severe punishment; and (e) the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of each of the instant offenses; and (e)

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices (see, e.g., Article 62(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is apparent that the application of the law in the judgment of the court below was omitted due to this mistake, and thus, it is corrected to add it ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.