The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant did not have any intention to rape in a mistake of fact.

B. The court below's decision on the grounds of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

C. It is unreasonable for the lower court to impose an order to disclose or notify the personal information of the Defendant on the ground that the order was unlawful.

2. Determination

A. In the judgment of the court below as to the assertion of mistake of fact, the defendant argued the same as the above reasons for appeal, and the court below rejected the above argument in the "decision on the defendant and his defense counsel" of the judgment. In comparison with the evidential materials, the judgment of the court below is justified.

이에 더하여, 원심이 적법하게 채택ㆍ조사한 증거에 의하여 알 수 있는 사정, 즉 피고인이 피해자를 50미터 정도 뒤따라가 피해자가 공원 안으로 들어가는 것을 확인하고 접근하였던 점, 피고인이 피해자의 멱살을 잡고 약 10미터 떨어진 벤치로 데려가 눕힌 후 피해자의 젖가슴을 손으로 만지고 입으로 빤 다음에 ‘차로 가자.’고 말한 점, 그 후 피고인은 ‘생리중이니 화장실만 가게 해 달라.’는 피해자의 말을 듣고 범행을 계속할 의도로 피해자를 붙잡고 화장실까지 따라간 점 등에 비추어 보면, 피고인에게 강간의 고의가 있었음을 충분히 인정할 수 있다.

Therefore, the argument of mistake is without merit.

B. Determination of the allegation of unfair sentencing is favorable to the Defendant, such as: (a) the rape of the instant case was committed in the attempted crime; (b) the Defendant supported the wife and two children; and (c) the Defendant has no significant criminal power, other than four times before and after the Defendant’s fine related to traffic.

On the other hand, the crime of rape in this case was committed with the intent of the defendant to rape the victim who returned home from a rare perspective, and confirmed that the victim entered the park.