The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable that the sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (a five years of imprisonment and a forty-hour order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant, while making a confession of the instant crime, contradicts his wrongness.

The defendant has agreed with the victim, and the victim has submitted a written application to the effect that he does not want the punishment of the defendant for both his family and defendant.

Defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the same crime.

The defendant's family relation is relatively clear.

However, the crime of this case constitutes a serious crime that severely undermines the sound ethics of our society by having a defendant raped or forced sexual intercourses with a victim who is a married couple over several occasions.

At the time, the Defendant showed an anti-human behavior that takes the victim who was under 14 years of age as the object of resolving his sexual desire, and in the process, there is a high possibility of criticism in light of the criminal history and method of the crime, such as drinking water exemption to the victim.

It seems that the victim was not only able to have suffered mental impulses due to the crime of this case, but also had a significant impact on the formation of sound sexual values.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, etc., all of the sentencing conditions and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court sentencing committee, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too heavy.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. As such, 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.