The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the defendant has a sexual intercourse under the agreement with the victim, and there is no fact that he has sexual intercourse by force with the victim, and there is no fact that the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim by threatening the F.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the facts charged of this case guilty. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case of unfair sentencing, the sentence imposed by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment, two years of short-term and two years of imprisonment, and 80 hours of order to complete sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, the prosecutor applied for the amendment of the indictment under paragraph (2) from “the first order of July 201,” to “the first order of August 2011,” and “the Defendant had F have sexual intercourse with the victim after having had F had sexual intercourse with the victim,” and the date of the crime under paragraph (3) to “the first order of August 201 from “the first order of August 2011 to the first order of September 2011,” and the date of the crime under paragraph (4) to “the date of the crime was changed from “the first order of September 201, 201” to “the first order of September 9, 2011” to “the date of the crime under paragraph (4) was changed to “the subject of the judgment below’s amendment to the indictment, thereby making it impossible to maintain the judgment below any further.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to adjudication, and the defendant stated in Articles 2 through 4 of the revised facts charged.