The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment, and four years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is established in light of the following circumstances: (a) the victim intrudes on the room, by taking advantage of the victim’s resistance impossible condition; (b) the victim committed an indecent act by taking advantage of the victim’s chest; (c) the victim committed an indecent act by taking advantage of the victim’s chest; and (d) the victim committed an indecent act once again by taking advantage of the victim’s chest, etc., which was committed on the part of the defendant’s resistance; (b) the crime is not good; and (c) the victim was deemed to have suffered a sense of sexual humiliation; and (d) the victim appears to have suffered a mental shock

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case from the investigative agency to this court, and is in depth divided, and the defendant does not have any past record of sex offense or any criminal record of suspended execution, and the defendant agreed in the original court only with the victim, and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions compared to the first instance court, and in the event that the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In full view of the aforementioned circumstances and other factors, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relation, circumstances, means and consequence of the crime, and the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable, and it does not seem that the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.