The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s punishment (3 million won in penalty, and 24 hours in completion of sexual assault treatment programs) against the Defendant is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the first instance court, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s judgment, and the circumstances for which the prosecutor alleged the grounds for sentencing are unfair, are deemed to have already been reflected in the sentencing grounds of the lower court. The Defendant recognized the crime, and is divided into the Defendant, the Defendant was the first offender without any criminal history, and the Defendant’s age, sex, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, and other various circumstances that form the conditions of sentencing as shown in the instant arguments and the record, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be determined that the lower court’s sentencing is unfair by exceeding the reasonable scope of discretion by being too unfilleded.

The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

3. Accordingly, 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. It is so decided as per Disposition.