A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

As the defendant and the prosecutor appealed on the conviction only on the ground of unfair sentencing, the dismissal of prosecution was excluded from the scope of attack and defense between the parties, and no other matters to be deliberated and determined ex officio.

Therefore, the scope of this Court's adjudication is limited to the conviction of the original judgment, and the conclusion of the original judgment is not followed with respect to the dismissal of public prosecution.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the part of the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, one hundred and sixty hours of community service, and 40 hours of sexual assault therapy) and the part of the order to attend a community service and a sexual assault treatment lecture is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case by the Prosecutor, the lower court’s punishment is too unfasible and unreasonable.

3. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, each of the instant offenses was committed by the Defendant by repeatedly sending cell phone text messages with the intent of intimidation to the victim L/W and the victim M/W as well as the victim’s O, who are the victim’s words of intimidation, in light of the content of the instant offense and the chest or risk of the veterinary act, the frequency of the crime, and the relationship with victims, etc., the crime was committed, and thus, was committed disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant is the defendant.