The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by two years of imprisonment.

provided that this ruling has become final and conclusive.

1. On the ground of the argument of unfair sentencing, this court made clear the intent of the defendant to have the victim use the defendant and not wanting the defendant's punishment by mutual consent with the victim.

This is an element of sentencing to be newly considered for the defendant.

In addition, the fact that the defendant has recognized the crime and reflects his mistake, that there is no criminal record exceeding the fine, that there is no criminal record against the defendant, and that the family members of the defendant want to be able to take into account in favor of the defendant.

In addition to these circumstances, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, career, environment, the background and consequence of the instant crime, and all of the sentencing factors indicated in the records and arguments, such as the circumstances after the instant crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court is excessively unreasonable even considering all of the factors disadvantageous to the Defendant among the various sentencing factors set forth by the lower court.

2. The judgment of the court below is reversed on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is justified, and it is so decided as follows.

[Discied reasoning of the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence recognized by the court is identical to that of the judgment below, and thus, it shall be quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Articles 299 and 297 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Mitigation of discretionary mitigation under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act ( considered in the preceding favorable circumstances);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspension of execution (the forward consideration shall be repeatedly given in favor of the former);

1. The Defendants under the main sentence of Article 16(2) and the proviso to Article 16(4) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and Articles 47(1) and 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the proviso to Article 49(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Amended by Act No. 16622, Nov. 26, 2019) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the same Act