The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is unreasonable as it is too unfasible that the lower court sentenced the Defendant (three years of imprisonment with prison labor and five years of suspended sentence).

2. The crime of this case is very likely to be raped twice by exercising violence against the victim with whom the defendant had a relationship of interest, and by threatening the victim to use violence or to spread sexually related dynamic images taken at the time of the victim’s preparation, thereby committing rapes over five times.

In particular, it is clear that the defendant's partial crime of crime has caused a big sexual humiliation and mental suffering to the victim because of the extreme science and variable, and the victim was aware of the additional mental impulse to the victim through sexually related dynamic dynamics spread intimidation.

However, the Defendant is fully aware of the instant crime, and reflects his or her mistake, including the act of virtual sexual intercourse, in depth.

Some crimes were committed during the period of death with the victim, and the relationship between the victim and the victim was maintained for a certain period after the crime was committed.

As the defendant agreed with the victim, the injured person does not want the punishment of the defendant.

Defendant has no record of criminal punishment except for a crime of violating the Act on the Establishment of Local Reserve Forces in 2012, which was sentenced once to a fine.

In addition, in full view of the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, and all of the sentencing conditions as shown in the argument in this case, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court sentencing committee, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant cannot be deemed unfair because it is too unfasible.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit.