In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

A. The punishment of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable for the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. Prosecutor 1) The part of the Defendant’s case (e.g., e., g., e., e., e., g., e., e., e., e., g., e., e.,

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of unreasonable sentencing by the defendant and prosecutor, the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual consent with the victim. The crime of this case is one of the concurrent crimes between the crime of quasi-rape for which judgment became final and conclusive and the crime of this case under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the principle of equity with the sentence should be taken into account

However, the crime of this case was committed on the part of a juvenile who had been a guest at the convenience store of the defendant's own working as the defendant's store and committed an indecent act by force, and it is not in light of the method and contents of the crime.

At the time of establishing a sound sexual identity and values, the victim seems to have suffered a lot of shock and sexual humiliation by committing the above crimes from the accused.

In particular, on July 2, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to 6 months of imprisonment and 2 years of probation for the obstruction of performance of official duties, and was sentenced to 1 year and 6 months of imprisonment for quasi-rape on June 2, 2015, and 4 days of imprisonment for the crime of quasi-rape.

In full view of the following circumstances, including these circumstances, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court shall be held liable.