All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The victim of mistake of facts is merely moving the Defendant’s vehicle to a hotel parking lot according to his/her own intention. Thus, the Defendant does not detain the victim.

B) The Defendant did not have inflicted an injury on the victim of coffee and glass. 2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the facts-finding inspection, the charge that the Defendant raped the victim within a LK7 car parked in the J hotel underground parking lot around 03:07 on August 9, 2014 (hereinafter “this part of the charges”).

2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the lower court also asserted that the Defendant had the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part. In light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant could have committed an injury to the victim by forcing the victim to leave the train after forcing the victim. In light of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s aforementioned determination is justifiable, and there is no illegality affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts, and there is no error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment. Accordingly, this part of the lower court’s assertion is without merit. 2) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court and the first instance court, the Defendant inflicted an injury on the victim by taking advantage of coffee and glass.