2. The crime of this case is likely to be criticized as being committed by the Defendant against the victim, who was a customer living in adjoining areas and frequently living in singing.

Meanwhile, there are also circumstances such as the fact that the extent of the type of force used by the Defendant was significantly weak, that the Defendant did not want the punishment against the Defendant by mutual consent with the victim and his parents, that the Defendant divided and reflected his mistake, and that the Defendant did not have any history of punishment for sexual crimes prior to the instant crime.

In addition, the defendant's age, criminal records, character and conduct, environment, family relations, motive and circumstances leading to the crime of this case, etc. as shown in the arguments of this case, the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee of the Supreme Court which was enforced at the time of the prosecution of this case [the crime of sex, general standards, the crime of indecent act by force (subject to more than 13 years of age), the special mitigation range of types 2, and the criteria for the suspension of execution (from April 15 to one year and six months in which the upper limit and lower limit of the sentence are reduced to 1/2] and the standards for the suspension of execution (from January 15 to one year and six months in which the upper limit of the sentence range are reduced to 1/2], and the positive reasons are determined in consideration of the following factors: (2) there is no previous punishment and there are no criminal records above the suspension of execution; (3) contingent crimes; and (3) negative reasons for engaging in the crime and no reason for general participation).