The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As long as the defendant intentionally led the victim of rape, the court below did not recognize the commencement of rape by taking into account only the type of force, even though the victim escaped and did not reach the suppression of the victim's resistance. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the commencement of rape.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (eight months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On February 28, 2015, the gist of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant: (a) around 09:35, at the convenience store where the victim D (Woo, 21 years old) working in Gumi-si (hereinafter “C”); and (b) on the part of the victim, the Defendant was unable to resist or make it impossible for the victim to take advantage of the victim’s shoulder, and (c) the victim was able to have sexual intercourse with the victim’s shoulder, and (d) the victim was unable to take advantage of his/her intent while leading the victim to have sexual intercourse. Accordingly, the lower court determined that it was difficult for the Defendant to have tried to rape the victim and attempted to commit rape, and that it was difficult for the victim to take advantage of his/her CCTV’s act of assault or intimidation to significantly make it difficult for him/her to resist or make it difficult for him/her to do so; and (b) the lower court should have determined that the Defendant commenced an act of assault or intimidation on the part of the victim to have sexual intercourse with the victim.