The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles caused injury to the victim during the course of covering the crime of rape with the victim after the crime of rape was completed.

Therefore, the defendant should not be considered as a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape, etc.) but be considered as a substantive concurrent crime of attempted rape and special injury under the Criminal Act.

Even if the defendant should be applied to the crime of rape in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the provision on mitigation of attempted crimes should be applied by recognizing attempted crimes, in light of the following: (a) the defendant stops rape by his/her own person; (b) the necessity of balanced punishment depending on his/her responsibility; and (c) the constitutionality of a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape, etc.) is excessively heavy.

B. The lower court’s imprisonment (five years of imprisonment, 40 hours of order) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. An ex officio determination prosecutor filed an application with the court for permission of the court for changes in the indictment, which regards the charge of rape and the charge of special injury as stated below, as the charge of the crime in this case, and the subject of the judgment was changed.

In addition, the defendant responded to all the charges that have been modified in accordance with the part of the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles in the court of the trial.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against the defendant was no longer maintained.

3. The judgment of the court below is based on the above reasons for ex officio reversal, and the defendant's remaining errors of facts, misapprehension of legal principles, and unfair sentencing