2. Determination: (a) the Defendant committed the instant crime at the expense of the workplace where many people are working; (b) the victim seems to have been suffering from extreme sexual humiliation and uneasiness; and (c) the victim and the victim, including the victim, committed several times in the lower court’s trial by taking into account the mental impulse and suffering experienced by the Defendant due to the instant crime; (d) the Defendant’s wrong recognition of the Defendant; (b) there is no history of punishment for the same crime; (c) there is no other favorable circumstances such as the Defendant’s order to attend school and the effect of preventing recidivism of personal information imposed on the Defendant; and (d) other favorable circumstances such as the motive and background leading up to the instant crime, the circumstances before and after the commission of the crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, occupation, family relation, etc., the lower court’s decision cannot be deemed to be unreasonable and unreasonable, taking into account the various circumstances that led to the Defendant to commit the instant crime.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.