2. Determination is more advantageous to the following: (a) the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes and reflects each of the instant crimes; (b) there is no record of punishment for the same kind of crime; (c) the degree of injury to the victim is not much serious; (d) the Defendant’s health status is not good; and (e) the equity with the case where the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously with the

However, the crime of this case is a crime that constitutes the so-called "etrob violence" in which the defendant taken a sexually related video without the victim's consent and made intimidation using dangerous objects, or by taking advantage of drinking materials and causing bodily injury to a female-friendly group in the school, under which the crime of this case was committed. The crime of this case is an unfavorable circumstance, such as the following: (a) the method of crime was brupt and the nature of the crime was bad; (b) the victim was suffering from a minor; (c) the sexual humiliation and mental impulse was deemed reasonable; and (d) the victim

In full view of the above circumstances and other circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive, means, and consequence, there is no special circumstance to determine the sentence different from that of the lower court, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, it is not recognized that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's assertion are without merit.

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