2. It is recognized that the crime of this case committed an indecent act against the same victim continuously by taking advantage of the mental and physical loss state, and that the nature of the crime is not good, and that the defendant did not agree with the victim, and that the victim want to be punished by the defendant.

However, in full view of the following: (a) the Defendant recognized the instant crime as one in place of the instant crime; (b) there is no record of criminal punishment except the instant crime; (c) the crime of forced indecent act in which a group of concurrent crimes is concurrent crimes after Article 37 of the Criminal Act and the instant case should be considered at the same time when the judgment was rendered; and (d) there is no change in circumstances that may be taken into account in sentencing after the sentence of the lower judgment; and (e) other various sentencing conditions as indicated in the instant argument, such as the background of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime; (b) the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, and environment, the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure). However, each “C” of the acts of conduct 1, 21 and 2, 7, of the judgment below ex officio under Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure is obvious that it is a clerical error in the “G”, and thus, it is corrected to dismiss it as each “G”.