The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

Sexual assault, 80 hours against the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is examined only to the extent of supplement in case of a defendant's written appeal and his defense counsel's written opinion, etc. submitted after the deadline for submitting the grounds for appeal expires.

In light of the following circumstances, there is no evidence to acknowledge the facts charged of this case, such as misunderstanding of facts, but the court below found the defendant guilty based on the victim's statement without credibility. Thus, the court below erred by misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

1) The Defendant found the victim, who was a head of a staff member, in order to not work at an entertainment business establishment, and moved the victim into his house. The Defendant was punished by a dispute over the issue of returning to the place of a staff member after the Defendant’s closure of the entertainment business, and during that process, the victim and the victim who tried to leave the Defendant’s residence were punished for a long time, but there was only sexual intercourse under naturally agreed upon, but there was no rape with the victim. 2) The Defendant consistently made a statement from the investigative agency, while the victim’s statements are not consistent with the police, the prosecution, the lower court’s court’s court’s court’s court’s court’s court’s judgment, and the statements of the business owner (D), G, etc. who was subject to an investigation for witness are also inconsistent.

3. There is no fact that the Defendant had exercised the tangible power to inflict bodily injury on the victim in the course of sexual intercourse, and there is no fact that the victim suffered bodily injury in the course of sexual intercourse

However, although there is a possibility that the victim would suffer an injury in the course of the above ditches, it cannot be viewed as an injury due to sexual intercourse.

In addition, the injury suffered by the victim is to the extent that it does not interfere with daily life, and does not constitute the injury of rape and bodily injury.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio shall be examined ex officio.

(a) December 11, 2018