2. The crime of this case is determined based on the following: (a) the Defendant committed an indecent act by force in subway stations against a victim under the age of 16 who was under the age of 16; (b) the nature of the crime was bad; and (c) the victim, who was under the age of the instant crime, appears to have satisfed about a considerable sense of sexual humiliation and mental impulse; (d) however, the Defendant did not recover from damage.

On the other hand, there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant was committed in the course of committing the instant crime, and the defendant did not have any specific criminal power other than fines due to the crime committed against the defendant, and that the defendant, as a person eligible for livelihood benefits, has difficulty in living by receiving a kidne surgery from the defendant and his spouse.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the following factors: Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive and background of the crime, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, since the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.