2) The Prosecutor’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendant is a favorable condition to the Defendant that confessions the facts charged in the instant case and repents his mistake, and that the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime by contingency under the influence of alcohol.

On the other hand, the following facts are disadvantageous to the defendant.

The defendant has been subject to criminal punishment for the same kind of crime in the past, and he has committed the crime of this case without being aware of it during the period of suspension of execution for the same kind of crime.

The degree of injury suffered by the victim is not easy.

However, the defendant did not seriously endeavor to recover the damage of the victim, and did not receive the victim's letter of intent to commit the crime.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the circumstances surrounding the instant crime, Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, and circumstances after the commission of the instant crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable to the extent that it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, is unreasonable.

Therefore, the argument that the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor is unfair is without merit.

3. The appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.