The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles also attempted to naturally sexual intercourse with victim I who has sexual intercourse with the previous victim I, but only refused and retired, and there was no assault, intimidation, or inserting a sexual organ into the victim's negative part.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding the facts charged in this case.

B. The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (three years of imprisonment, and forty hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles, the lower court’s determination is sufficiently recognizable, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, and the fact that the Defendant committed rape against the victim, thereby constituting the crime.

The decision was determined.

① In the initial police investigation, the victim was unable to keep the Defendant out of his inner arms and clothes and strawing his body while enjoying sound.

In order to prevent the defendant from being injured by his hand, the following studio was inserted into the studio.

“The 108th page of the record of evidence). The victim was consistently found at F’s bottom at the lower end, and the Defendant exceeded the victim’s lower part and prevented the victim’s body from sustaining the victim’s body, thereby inserting the following sexual instruments into his or her own sexual organ:

was stated.

② At the first police investigation conducted on June 24, 2015, prior to a dispute between the victim and the victim due to the accusation of fraud, etc., G was in line with the victim’s will and clothes, and was in line with the victim’s will and clothes, and was in line with the victim’s body.

“....”