The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (amounting to five million won) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. The fact that the defendant is recognized as substitute for the crime is favorable to the defendant.

However, even though the Defendant had a duty to take appropriate measures to prevent damage caused by the opening, such as frequently checking the neck while raising the dog or installing fences, the victimized person was negligent in doing so. The Defendant suffered injury. The nature of the crime is not good, the Defendant’s dog was released even before the instant crime was committed, and the Defendant was aware of such fact, and the Defendant neglected it. The Defendant appears to have failed to seek a proper apology or letter, and the victim was punished, and the victim appears to have failed to do so, taking full account of various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., and the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant arguments and the record, it does not seem unfair because the sentencing of the lower court is too large.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. According to the 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.