The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

However, for four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles in the following point of view, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles. (A) In relation to the part of rape injury, the Defendant raped the victim as stated in this part of the facts charged and inflicted bodily injury on the victim in the course of the rape injury, but only once more than once the victim's head was panty, and the Defendant did not have sexual intercourse with the victim's grandchildren, not by combining the victim's loss and appearance with the Belgium, but by combining it with Belgium in order to prevent the victim from reporting after sexual intercourse and prevent escape.

B) The robbery portion is not between the Defendant and the victim’s smartphones and cash with the intent of unlawful acquisition, but rather between the victim’s failure to report. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, 80 hours of sexual assault treatment programs, 10 years of disclosure notification orders, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the victim was the juvenile under 16 years of age at the time of the instant case, and the defendant was the juvenile at the time of the instant case. Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on this part erred by misapprehending the facts in violation of the rules of evidence. 2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. 1) As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles on the injury by robbery, the victim consistently states that “the victim made only once in Rade to pande” as stated in this part of the facts charged from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, “the victim got off the victim’s head by taking off the victim’s panty,” and the victim also states that “the victim was the victim’s head by taking out the victim’s head.”