2. There are circumstances that can be considered in favor of the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant led to the confession and reflect of the crime, the fact that the victim agreed smoothly with the victim, the tangible power or the degree of indecent act committed by the defendant is not heavy, the death of the child and his wife, the divorce with his wife, etc., making it economically difficult to live.

However, the crime of this case is a case in which the defendant, who is the teacher to protect students, committed an indecent act against the student.

The victim seems to have suffered a significant mental impulse due to the instant case, and is likely to have an adverse impact on the formation of sound sexual consciousness in the future.

In full view of such circumstances as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background of the instant crime, circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence that applied the suspended sentence to imprisonment, which is calculated at the lower court by discretionary mitigation, cannot be deemed unreasonable because it is too unreasonable. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act for lack of grounds.