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 a period of four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (a punishment of imprisonment with prison labor of three years, and orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs with 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. The Defendant, while maintaining her friendship with the victim who is the wife of the post-age, had the victim consulted about about about it, had the victim under the influence of alcohol and had a similar raped with the victim, and subsequently, had the victim interfered with his/her sexual intercourse with the Defendant by making a false statement as if the victim had sexual intercourse with the Defendant, thereby threatening the victim’s husband, her mother, and her husband, her mother, and her relative to know about the above sexual intercourse. Furthermore, the Defendant attempted to rape with the victim by threatening the victim to the her mother and threatening him/her to commit the crime of intimidation.

Each of the crimes of this case is a bad crime in light of the relationship between the defendant and the victim, the course, details, and methods of the crime.

The victim seems to have caused considerable sexual humiliation, mental impulse, and uneasiness due to each of the instant crimes.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant's mistake is recognized and against himself, and the defendant paid the agreed amount of money equivalent to the victim by the defendant's side, and the injured party expressed his intention that he does not want the punishment of the defendant.

There is no history of sex offense against the defendant, and there is no criminal record who has been sentenced to more severe punishment than a fine for other crimes.

These circumstances are favorable to the defendant.

In full view of all the sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings of this case, including the above circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the offense, means and consequence, the sentence of the lower court is deemed to be too unreasonable.

3. The appeal by the defendant is with merit, and thus, Article 364, Paragraph 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.