The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

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

. against the Defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The misunderstanding of facts found the Defendant guilty of all of the facts constituting the crime 1 and 2 on the day of the instant case and the P.M. on two occasions on the day of the instant case. However, the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim only once on the day of the instant case, and there was no desire or intimidation to the victim at that time. Even if the Defendant expressed a desire or intimidation, the act does not constitute assault or intimidation to the extent that it would make it impossible to resist the victim. Ultimately, the Defendant did not commit any crime like the crime 1 and 2 in the judgment of the lower court, and thus, found the Defendant guilty of all of the facts constituting the crime 1 and 2. [In this case, the Defendant did not submit the statement of grounds for appeal (the Defendant has read and read his comments), and only his defense counsel submitted the statement of grounds for appeal, and in that case, it appears to the effect that the act of sexual intercourse under paragraph (1) in the judgment of the lower court itself is acknowledged, and that it is alleged to deny only the act of sexual intercourse itself.

However, in light of the contents of the defendant's statement at the prosecutor's office (the defendant stated that he had sexual intercourse only once at the prosecutor's office, and specifically, on the day of this case as stated in the facts constituting the crime 1 of the judgment below, the defendant stated that he had sexual intercourse after the victim's house was taken in P.M. as stated in the judgment of the court below, such as the facts constituting the crime 2 of the judgment below, the above reasons for appeal do not seem to have sexual intercourse twice as stated in the judgment of the court below, rather than to the purport of denying only the crime under paragraph (1) of the crime as stated in the judgment of the court below, and it seems that the defendant did not have sexual intercourse only once with the facts constituting the crime under paragraph (2)