2. The nature of the crime is not good in light of the method, contents, etc. of the crime of indecent act by compulsion on the market, and the defendant failed to receive the statement from the victim;

In light of the above, the prosecutor's argument that the sentencing of the first instance court, which sentenced the suspension of the execution of imprisonment, is somewhat weak is acceptable.

However, considering the above major circumstances that are disadvantageous to the defendant, the sentence of imprisonment without prison labor is too harsh to the defendant who has been sentenced once a fine and has no same criminal power. However, it is difficult to view that the court of first instance selected as the principal sentence is a minor sentence, and the grace period is not a short period of two years.

In addition, as pointed out in the judgment of the court of first instance, along with the circumstance that the defendant recognized his mistake from the court of first instance to the trial, and expressed his intention of reflectivity, the following circumstances that occurred after the decision of the court of first instance was rendered, namely, the decision of recommending settlement that orders the defendant to compensate for the crime committed by the victim was confirmed and the circumstances that the defendant completed compensation following the above decision should also be considered as the grounds for sentencing in favor of the defendant.

Furthermore, although the court of the first instance exempted the defendant from the disclosure order and notification order of personal information, the defendant's reflective demands, such as community service for 120 hours as incidental disposition, taking 40 hours sexual assault treatment lectures, and taking employment restrictions for 3 years (child-related institutions, etc. and welfare facilities for the disabled).