2. The crime of this case was committed repeatedly by a young female on several occasions in the studio building; in light of the motive, period, frequency, contents, etc. of the crime, it appears that the mental impulse suffered by the victims seems to have been considerable; the defendant did not directly intrude into the studio room room, and the crime of this case cannot be deemed to be less than that of the crime; the defendant committed the crime of this case during the period of repeated crime due to the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter "Catra") and the fact that there was a history of punishment for entering a residence, etc., which is disadvantageous to the defendant, while the defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case.

In light of the aforementioned circumstances, comprehensively taking into account the circumstances that led to the Defendant to commit the crime, the age, health condition, character and conduct, environment, and circumstances that are conditions for sentencing as indicated in the instant case, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion cannot be accepted.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.