The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The lower judgment did not reflect the substance of the grounds for appeal, contrary to what is alleged in the ground of appeal, by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the day of the instant case.

The sentencing of the lower court (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for four months and one year of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

As to the assertion of misconception of the facts as to the grounds for appeal, the expression of intention not to punish a person who is not subject to punishment should be made to the investigation agency or the court. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the victim stated at the investigation agency to the effect that he/she wishes to punish the defendant, and the victim did not express his/her intention not to punish in the investigation agency or the court below.

Even if so, the injured person has expressed his intention not to punish the accused to the investigation agency or the court.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

Although there are no circumstances that may be considered in light of the circumstances, such as the absence of the degree of violence as to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, considering the fact that there is no special circumstance or circumstance that may be newly considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment, and other various circumstances that form the conditions for the argument and the sentencing specified in the record of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since there is no ground for appeal by the defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition.