A. In light of the fact that the defense counsel accused against the mistake and that there is no record of punishment for the same kind of crime, the sentence of the lower court that sentenced to the order to complete the sexual assault treatment program for eight months and forty hours is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the fact that the crime of this case by the prosecutor was committed by the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol at the new wall time, by force, by force on one’s own vehicle where the victim D was parked in the vicinity of the Defendant, and that it is not good that the crime was committed by force, and that the victim’s punishment is desired, the sentence of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the court below is found to be erroneous and there is no past record of punishment for the same kind of crime. Meanwhile, the crime of this case is not good because it is found that the defendant was under the influence of alcohol and was in his own vehicle with the victim D (19 years old) who was used in the way when he was her home, found the victim D while he was under the influence of alcohol, and her vehicle parked on the bekeway, put the victim's entrance, cut the victim's her broke, cut the victim's broke, cut the victim's broke, cut the victim's broke, cut the victim's broke, cut the victim's body, and did not commit an indecent act by force, such as the victim's sexual humiliation and fear of the victim's sexual humiliation. The victim's compensation was not made until the court below, and the victim's punishment was sought, and the victim's age was excessive, the circumstances and circumstances of the crime of this case, etc., and the aforementioned circumstances and the defendant's motive and circumstances were too excessive.

3. As the appeal of the defendant and the prosecutor’s appeal are without merit, Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.