The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, at the time of the instant crime, was drunk and was in a state of mental disability.

B. The court below's decision on the grounds of unfair sentencing (5 million won of a fine) is too unlimited and unfair.

2. Determination

A. In the judgment of the court below as to the claim of mental disability, the defendant argued the same as the above reasons for appeal, while recognizing the fact that the defendant had drinking alcohol, the court below judged that the defendant did not seem to have reached a weak state of ability to discern things or make decisions, and further rejected the claim under Article 10 (2) of the Criminal Act that "in the event that sexual assault crime against a child or juvenile was committed in the state of mental disorder caused by drinking, Article 10 (2) of the Criminal Act may not apply." The court below rejected the claim in accordance with Article 19 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse. In comparison with the judgment of the court below

B. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant are that the Defendant recognized a crime in the lower court on the assertion of unfair sentencing, received a letter of favor from the victim, and the Defendant did not have any criminal power.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant committed the crime of this case at an open place, and that the female juvenile victim seems to have suffered a serious sense of sexual humiliation due to the crime of this case, etc. are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, the sentencing guidelines are not applicable since the defendant's age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive and background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. are sentenced to a fine.

Considering the above, it is difficult to view that the court below's sentence is too unreasonable because it is too unreasonable for the defendant.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.