All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Fact-finding that the defendant attempted to have sexual intercourse with the victim. However, the reason is that at the time when the victim committed a cruel act against the defendant, “the victim would be relieved of KRW 1 million” or “the defendant would be relieved of KRW 2 million.” In addition, in the process, the defendant did not have assault and threat to the extent that the victim would not resist. In addition, the court below's finding the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment, taking into account various sentencing conditions, taking into account various sentencing factors, the court below's punishment (two years and six months of imprisonment) against the defendant is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the various sentencing conditions of the prosecutor (unfair sentencing), the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. 1) In determining the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court shall assess the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc., taking into account all the circumstances that make it difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, such as the appearance and attitude of the witness who is taking an oath before a judge, and the penance of the statement, and the fact that the witness’s statements made by the witness, including the victim, are consistent and consistent with the facts charged (see Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 2009). In order to determine the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc., the court shall not dismiss them without permission, unless there is any other evidence that objectively deeming the credibility of the statements made by the witness, including the victim, is objectively consistent and consistent with the facts charged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do362, Apr. 15, 2005; 2012Do36126, Jun. 26, 2012).