2. It is recognized that, without being aware of the Defendant, he/she was living in the detention house without being aware of the fact that he/she committed the instant crime against the victim within the detention house, and that he/she has the record of being punished several times for the same crime.

However, in light of the circumstances of the instant case, such as the fact that the Defendant is recognized as committing the instant crime, the victim’s contact first with the Defendant being confined in the detention house, and paying a fine by himself, etc., the degree of the Defendant’s deception and the intent to commit the crime of deception, the fact that the victim was weak, the victim was satisfied and the victim was fully agreed with, the Defendant was currently pregnant, the Defendant was currently pregnant, and other circumstances that form the condition for sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court cannot be deemed unfair because the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unfeasible.

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