2. The crime of this case was committed by the victim with sexual humiliation, and thus, is highly punished for the illegality of the act.

In addition, considering the fact that the victim is trying to punish the defendant, strict punishment corresponding to the criminal liability is required for the defendant.

However, the defendant seems to have recognized the crime of this case and committed a mistake.

In addition, it is difficult to consider the circumstances leading to the crime as a result of the misunderstanding that the victim, who is a disabled person, was involved in the crime.

In addition, in full view of the fact that the degree of indecent act in this case is not much serious, that the defendant is a disabled person of class 3 of intellectual disability so far, that the defendant is a primary offender who has no record of criminal punishment as well as the same criminal records so far, and that the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., which are conditions for sentencing, such as the circumstances after the crime, the sentencing of the court below is not recognized to be appropriate and too unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's ground of appeal cannot be accepted.

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