The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although there was a misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles that the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim, it is not rape of the victim as it was conducted with the consent of the victim.

Therefore, the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. 1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles as to the argument that the Defendant and the defense counsel argued the same purport as this part of the appeal, and the lower court rejected the above argument in detail, 2). In full view of the following circumstances revealed in light of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s determination is just and acceptable even if all of the evidence submitted by the Defendant and the facts alleged are considered.

Therefore, this part of the defendant and defense counsel's argument is without merit.

① At the time of the instant crime from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, the victim was unable to return to the front math after the front math of the back. The Defendant, “I want to go back to the front math of the back math, so I would not have to go out because I want to go back to the front math of the back math. It would rather be done by a large number of cases. It would be done by a large number of cases. It would not be said that the Defendant was able to go back to the front math of the back math and the inner math of the Defendant’s body while being in a toilet, and cut off all the body from the front math to the lower half of the buckbucks. The Defendant was able to go back to the front math of the back math and the lower court.” As the Defendant was able to take the front math of the Defendant’s hand back to the front huck.