The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal (the imprisonment of three years and the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours) is unreasonable because the sentence is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the defendant is a serious crime, and a serious crime is also a bad crime. The defendant's act of compelling the victim to commit an indecent act by force when the victim was drunk in the workplace and was unable to do so, and the defendant's act of quasi-rape by inducing the victim to have sexual intercourse with the intent of committing a sexual intercourse with the victim.

In the situation where other persons who had drinking together do not seem to have been on the spot and the victim had already taken the place, the defendant had been able to safely return the victim to the victim as a person in the drinking place who had the victim's superior to himself/herself, but did not try to fulfill his/her responsibility, but rather used the victim's sexual desire and control.

Moreover, any person can be aware of the fact that the short-term part-time part-time part-time part-time part-time part-time part-time, such as the victim's body and it is difficult to refuse to do so in such a part-time part-time part-time part-time part.

In light of this, there was a face of the Defendant’s occurrence of a part of the victim’s exploitation status.

I seem to appear.

The victim received serious mental and psychological impulses due to the continuous crime of the defendant.

Therefore, as there is a high possibility of criticism against the defendant, criminal liability corresponding thereto is necessary.

However, there is no possibility that the defendant is fully aware of the crime, reflects the mistake, and is subject to criminal punishment before.

In the court below, the victim already expressed that he does not want to punish the defendant by accepting the criminal defendant's death crime.

However, when the court below sentenced the defendant to a three-year sentence of imprisonment, the court below decided that the defendant voluntarily disclosed his name in the appellate court and wanting to punish the defendant to return his name to two children and wife as soon as possible.