But prosecutors said the sentence failed to recognise the seriousness of his offences.
Three judges at the Court of Criminal Appeal in Edinburgh agreed and increased Hume’s jail term to six years.
In the judgement, Lord Brodie wrote that Lady Scott, who presided over the trial, should have imposed a lengthier sentence on Hume by following the example of similar cases .
He wrote: “The respondent pleaded guilty to two very serious offences.
“Other than the fact that he had no previous convictions, there is little if anything by way of mitigation in the respondent’s personal circumstances or his response to his offending as recorded in the background reports.
“Looking to the cumulative effect of these various factors we have concluded that the headline sentence selected by the sentencing judge was not only a lenient one but an unduly lenient one.”
Lord Brodie, who considered the case alongside Lady Dorrian and Lord Turnbull, said the fact Hume videoed his crime amounted to a “material aggravation” that merited a higher sentence.
During proceedings earlier this year, the court head how the boy’s father left the Glasgow flat in the afternoon to pick up his wife and asked Hume to babysit.
Prosecutor Angela Gray said: “The accused took the opportunity to rape the boy and whilst doing so filmed the act using his mobile telephone.”
When the parents returned home, Hume was sitting on the couch and the boy was in his bedroom.
The child then entered the living room and accused Hume of sexually abusing him.
At this point, the court heard how Hume became irate and started to wave his arms and told the boy: “Mate, you were the one that was being bad and pulling down your trousers.”
He added: “I am no having this” and swore at the boy.
Hume then ran away leaving behind his two mobile phones and his jacket.
The family contacted Police Scotland and the force’s cyber-crime unit managed to extract the footage from Hume’s phone.
The footage lasts for approximately 5 minutes.
During the recording, the accused is heard to call the complainer a “good boy”.
Following the court case, prosecutors launched an appeal against Hume’s sentence.
Summarising the Crown’s argument, Lord Brodie wrote: “It is submitted that the sentence failed to satisfy the need for retribution, deterrence and protection of the public.”
With many thanks to: UK database