2. The crime of this case is an act of indecent act by compulsion, such as opening a studio house of the victim and exposing the studio room room of the victim from the victim's locked by opening the entrance door to the victim's opposition to the victim, drawing up the victim's chest, leaving the victim's chest, leaving the victim's chest, leaving the victim's chest and tamp, etc. The crime of this case is poor; the victim was committed by indecent act by force from the defendant who intruded the victim's own residence, and even if the defendant did not receive a studio from the victim, etc., it is unfavorable to the defendant.

However, in light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was a primary offender; and (b) the Defendant sought the victim’s house in order to report for a long time that he had not come to death; and (c) the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime contingently; (d) the Defendant led to the instant crime by confessioning the instant crime from the lower court to the trial; (b) the Defendant deposited KRW 10,000,000 for the victim although it was not agreed upon; and (c) other favorable factors such as the Defendant’s character and behavior, environment, and circumstances after the crime; and (d) the application of the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee by the Sentencing Committee, it does not seem that the lower court’s sentence imposed while ordering the victim to attend the curriculum of treating sexual assault for 40 hours 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 on the ground that it is without merit.