A. In light of the fact that a defense counsel’s defense counsel’s error is against and efforts have been made to compensate for damage, the lower court’s sentence imposing fines of KRW 3,000,000 and orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs for 80 hours is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the fact that the crimes committed by the public prosecutor committed by the defendant are of significant and bad character of the crime, the fact that the situation of the crime is weak, the victim is punished by the defendant, etc., the sentence of the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. The Defendant’s crime of this case is not good to the nature of the crime committed by indecent act by force by force on the part of the Defendant at the subway platform, which is committed by indecent act by force on the part of the victim, and the victim wants to punish the Defendant. Meanwhile, the Defendant’s mistake is against the Defendant, and there is no record of criminal punishment, and efforts are made to prevent recidivism by taking into account the motive and background of the crime of this case, circumstances before and after the crime, degree of damage, and other various factors stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, which are the conditions for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s character and conduct, etc. as the instant records and arguments, it is not determined that the punishment imposed by the lower court is appropriate, and it is not determined that the punishment imposed by the Defendant is excessively excessive, excessive, or excessive uneased.

Therefore, the above ground of appeal is without merit.

3. The appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.