2. In light of the fact that the crime of this case was committed by the Defendant’s indecent act by force, which is a female juvenile, on the street, and the Defendant appears to have been shocked by the victim who has not yet been mentally and physically mature, and the Defendant did not take any measures to recover from damage up to the trial. Nevertheless, even if he had the record of being punished by a fine for the same kind of crime on February 8, 2011, the Defendant committed the crime of this case again, it is deemed that there is a need to punish the Defendant significantly because the character and conduct is inferior and the quality of the crime is unreasonable.

However, there are favorable circumstances for the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant is realizing and opposing his mistake, the fact that the defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case in a situation where the judgment ability and impulse adjustment ability is somewhat insufficient compared to the general public.

In addition, considering the various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive and circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s decision to suspend the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for the Defendant by adding security measures for considerable treatment in society, such as probation and the order to attend a lecture for treatment of sexual assault, is sufficiently justifiable. It is not deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

The prosecutor's ground of appeal is without merit.

3. The appeal by the public prosecutor on the conclusion of the judgment is without merit, and it is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.