A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (five million won in penalty) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence declared by the prosecutor by the court below is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. As to each of the unlawful arguments of sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor, it is recognized that the Defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of the period of suspension of execution due to the obstruction of the performance of official duties, as well as the record that the Defendant was sentenced to a fine and a suspended sentence on several occasions due to violent crimes, etc., and that the Defendant committed the instant crime.

However, considering the fact that the Defendant led to the confession of the crime, the Defendant’s mistake was divided and agreed with the victim, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, etc., and all of the sentencing conditions stated in the instant pleadings, such as the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, the sentence imposed by the lower court does not seem to be deemed to be adequate, too heavy, or unfair because it is too unfeasible.

Therefore, each argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that all of the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Provided, That since it is apparent that the appeal made by the court below ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure was omitted from this error after the "Article 70 of the Criminal Act" in the detention clause of the detention clause in the Nowon Station, the application of the law in the judgment below