The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. From the time when the defendant was a middle school student, although the victim was adopted from his big son, it seems that the victim continued to have sexual intercourse with the victim of 10 years of age who was in the relationship with him/her, and even until the victim reaches the age of 12 until he/she reached the age of 12. The victim did not form a sexual concept due to his/her age and a sufficient perception about his/her sexual intercourse with the victim, and the victim did not physically and physically have sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of his/her sexual intercourse with his/her physical and mental health, thereby causing a significant adverse effect on the victim in forming a sound sexual value, and due to the instant case, he/she came to know of considerable impulse to his/her relatives including his/her day.

However, the defendant also led to this case as a net course at the time of the minor's second damage, and the defendant was not easily missing, all of the crimes of this case were led to confessions and reflects with no criminal record, the parent's punishment system and deep relation is formed, the parents are also able to properly guide the defendant in the future, the victim's family members are not punished against the defendant, and the victim's family members are able to do their best to prevent the second damage, and all the sentencing factors specified in the arguments of this case such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, family environment, relationship with the victim, and the motive and circumstances before and after the crime of this case.

Even if the court below's punishment against the defendant is considered to be unfair.

3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is justified.