The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) on the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The circumstances alleged by the Defendant as an element of sentencing in this court were already revealed during the hearing process of the lower court, and there is no particular change in the situation in the matters subject to sentencing after the sentence of the lower court.

In light of the above circumstances and the following facts, although the Defendant recognized a mistake in the trial, the Defendant is in a position that requires high morality and integrity as a journalist, the Defendant, despite having been sentenced to imprisonment for the same kind of crime in spite of his position that requires high morality and integrity, was committed again in the instant crime under the condition that he was sentenced to imprisonment for 6 months, 2 years of a suspended sentence, and 2 months of a suspended sentence, and there are multiple penal records, such as being sentenced to imprisonment for a different crime, the sentencing of the lower court is improved beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

In full view of the facts that it is difficult to see the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and means of committing a crime, results, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions in the instant arguments and records, such as the circumstances after committing a crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is unreasonable.

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