Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter the defendant) did not have any intent to rape the victim F, and did not have any act of deceiving the victim's chest and cutting off the her chest.

B. Although the Defendant’s attempt to rape was established by misunderstanding the legal principles, the Defendant did not attempt to rape in an opportunity to robbery, but forcibly took the part in attempted rape, and thus, the Defendant cannot be deemed to have attempted to rape, and only can it be punished as concurrent crimes for attempted rape and robbery.

(c)

The defendant with mental and physical weakness was in a state of mental and physical weakness at the time of committing the crime of this case due to a very low intelligence and alcohol dependence math, and a man with mental and physical weakness.

(d)

The punishment of the lower court (eight years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Part 1 of the case concerning the assertion of misunderstanding the facts that the court below duly adopted and investigated, that is, there is no evidence that the defendant denies the facts charged regarding rape between the investigation agency and the court of the court below, and the defendant argued in the court of the court below the same opinion as misunderstanding of the above legal principles, which is also premised on recognizing attempted rape. In the course of committing an act like the facts charged against the victim F, the defendant's entry into the above victim was the victim's injury and the above victim was faced with the victim's escape. In addition, in the same circumstance as the facts charged in the new wall time, the defendant had the intention of rape, if he entered the above defendant's injury, in the same manner as the facts charged.

In full view of the natural point of view, the fact that the defendant, with the intention of rape, committed an act identical to that of the facts charged, can be sufficiently recognized.

We cannot accept this part of the defendant's argument.

(ii)..