The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the exemption of the lower court’s punishment (three years of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution, community service, 160 hours of sexual assault treatment, 80 hours of course) and, in particular, from the order to disclose and notify the personal information of the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, there are circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, such as: (a) the instant crime was committed by the Defendant by intrusioning on the house of the victim and rapeing the victim; (b) the nature and circumstances of the relevant crime were not somewhat weak; and (c) the instant case appears to have caused a considerable sense of sexual humiliation to the victim.

On the other hand, however, there is no history of sexual assault crime against the defendant, and there is no criminal conviction or heavier than a suspended sentence, and the defendant shows a attitude of reflecting his depth while attempting to commit all the crimes of this case. The defendant and the victim met together with drinking at a singing room up to seven hours before the day of the crime, and come home first to the defendant's house, and the defendant found the victim's house without the end, and it does not seem that the defendant had the intention of rape from the time of entering the victim's house to find out the victim's house without the end, and there is also a normal situation favorable to the defendant, such as that the victim and the victim do not want the punishment of the defendant.

The above factors of sentencing are either unfavorable or favorable to the defendant. In full view of the fact that the court below sentenced the defendant to a suspended sentence of three years within the scope of the recommended sentence set in the sentencing guidelines (three years to five years), and other factors of sentencing as shown in the arguments in this case, such as character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive, circumstance, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the court below sentenced the defendant.