The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The judgment below

In the order, the defendant shall complete the sexual assault therapy for 40 hours.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is determined based on the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant committed sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the victim’s resistance impossible condition; (b) the nature and criminal intent of the crime is very heavy; (c) the victim appears to have suffered a huge mental impulse and sexual humiliation; (d) the victim appears to have suffered considerable difficulty in his school life; and (e) the victim was punished by the Defendant.

The fact that the defendant is the first offender as a university student of 23 years of age, and the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and reflects his mistake is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, considering the various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the defendant's age, sex, family relationship, and environment, and the result of the application of sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal is without merit, and the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the Defendant’s appeal is ordered to complete the curriculum of treating sexual assault for 40 hours in the judgment of the court below.

“The Defendant shall order the completion of the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours.”

Since it is apparent that it is a clerical error in the text, it shall be decided ex officio pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, and it shall be decided as ordered.