A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years and six months, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The instant crime is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant committed an act of coercion against a victim under the age of her age, who is not a one-off-to-face; (b) the nature of the crime is not weak; and (c) the victim appears to have obtained a considerable physical or mental shock; and (d) the victim did not have sufficient compensation until the

On the other hand, the defendant recognizes all of the crimes of this case, and repents in depth, and the fact that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, in cases where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In full view of other circumstances that are the conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, relationship with the victim, motive or circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is not deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unhued and it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the above argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is 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.