The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds of appeal is too unreasonable.

2. Under our criminal litigation law, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, there exists an area unique to the first instance judgment regarding sentencing, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence by comprehensively taking account of the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances of the Defendant, including the fact that the Defendant recognized and reflected the instant crime, and the victim agreed with the victim does not want the punishment of the Defendant, and there is no change in the special sentencing conditions that could change the sentence of the lower court at the trial.

In full view of various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relationship, health status, criminal history and contents thereof, attitude in an investigation agency and court, nature of a crime, motive, means and consequence of a crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too unreasonable as it goes beyond the reasonable scope of its discretion.

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