All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. The sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of two years and six months, and the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program with 80 hours) is too unreasonable.

B. It is unfair that the Prosecutor’s sentence is too unfilled and the lower court exempted the Defendant from an order to disclose personal information.

2. Determination

A. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the lower court, as indicated in its reasoning, took into account the favorable and unfavorable circumstances for the Defendant, and determined the sentence by comprehensively taking into account all the factors of sentencing, including the Defendant’s age, sex, family environment, and the circumstances after the crime, as indicated in the instant argument.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in comparison with the records, it is just and acceptable. In this case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing after the judgment of the court below, the sentence of the court below is too heavy or it cannot be deemed unfair because it is too heavy or flick as the defendant and the prosecutor claims.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the defendant and prosecutor's assertion.

B. As to the unfair assertion that exemption from disclosure of personal information is unfair, the lower court, in full view of the circumstances as stated in its reasoning, has a special reason not to disclose the personal information to the Defendant.

The decision was determined.

The judgment of the court below is justified in comparison with the records, and there are no errors such as the prosecutor's assertion, and the prosecutor's assertion on this part is not accepted.

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