The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the punishment imposed by the court below (the punishment imposed by the court below is too uneasible, 2 years of suspended execution in August and 80 hours of suspended execution) is too uneasy, in light of the following: (a) the nature of each of the crimes in this case was very poor; (b) the crime of forced indecent act committed by force after being investigated by the police due to intrusion into female toilets and shooting of cameras was committed; and (c) the victim of the prosecution wants to punish the defendant.

2. Although the prosecutor claims against the defendant on the grounds of appeal, the court below seems to have suspended the execution of the sentence against the defendant, in light of the need to give the defendant an opportunity to reflect on the treatment within society instead of isolation in society, although the defendant's criminal liability is heavy.

In addition, considering the circumstances that the Defendant committed each of the instant offenses, including the background leading up to the instant offenses, method, circumstances after the commission of the offense, Defendant’s age, environment, and sexual conduct, and the reasons for sentencing as indicated in the instant records and arguments, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too uneasy and unreasonable, even considering the aforementioned unfavorable circumstances.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition.