The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant pays 15,240,000 won to the applicant for compensation for the trial.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (two years and four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing, determined the punishment by taking into account the various circumstances as indicated in its reasoning.

In addition to the circumstances indicated by the lower court, no new circumstance exists to change the sentence of the lower court in the trial, and even considering all the sentencing factors indicated in the argument of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing was too excessive and so it exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

The defendant's argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. Since an application for remedy order filed by the applicant for compensation of the trial at the court is well-grounded, Article 25 (1), Article 31 (1), and Article 31 (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings order the payment of KRW 15,240,000 by fraud to the defendant pursuant to Article 31 (3) of the same Act, and a provisional execution is attached to the above compensation order.

Article 33 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings by filing an appeal against the lower judgment, the part concerning an order for compensation to an applicant for compensation of the lower court shall be deemed to have appealed pursuant to Article 33 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. However, although the grounds for appeal regarding the part concerning the order for compensation among the appeal filed by the Defendant and his/her defense counsel are not indicated in the petition of appeal and the reasons for appeal