The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In accordance with paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court below, there is no fact that there was no assault or intimidation against the victim due to the blicking of the victim's timber or the blicking of the victim, and there is no fact that the Defendant inserted the Defendant's sexual organ into the

B. In light of the legal principles, the injury suffered by the victim is not caused by the defendant's act, and even if it was caused by the defendant's act, it can not be deemed that the victim's physical health condition was changed to the extent that it could occur in sexual intercourse by agreement, and that the victim's physical health condition was changed

C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of assessing the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court, if there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance court clearly erred in its determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court, or if there are exceptional cases where it is deemed that maintaining the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is considerably unfair in full view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the results of additional evidence examination conducted by the time of closing arguments until the closing of argument in the appellate court, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance court’s determination on the ground that the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s determination (Supreme Court Decision 2010Do3846, Jun. 24, 2010).

The following circumstances recognized by the court below based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, namely, the defendant, at the prosecutor's office, and the defendant sing.