The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

The punishment sentenced by the court below (five years of suspended execution, etc. for three years of imprisonment) shall be too unhued and unfair.

Judgment

A. Each of the instant crimes against the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing is unfair for the following reasons: (a) the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, has sexual intercourse with the victim under the age of 16 who is in the condition of mental disorder; (b) taken the body of the victim in a camera; and (c) assisted the Defendant to engage in sexual traffic by protecting the juvenile runaway without reporting to the head of a police station; (d) in light of the content and circumstances of each of the instant crimes, the liability for the crime is very heavy; (e) the victim of the quasi-rape crime was receiving a large mental shock due to the relevant crime; and (e) the victim was deemed to have caused severe sexual humiliation; and (e) the victim might have a negative effect

On the other hand, the defendant recognized the crime of this case and divided the wrongness in depth, and the prosecutor asserts that the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant as agreed with the victim of quasi-rape, and that the victim wants to punish the defendant by changing the attitude of the defendant after the agreement with the defendant.

According to the records of the investigation report bound in title 1 to 549 of the evidence records, the fact that the mother of the victim called "the defendant agreed with the defendant, but the defendant later made intimidation to the victim, so the defendant's punishment is desired."

However, in view of the fact that a written agreement between the Defendant, the victim and the victim AC prior to the aforementioned telephone conversation was prepared and submitted to an investigative agency that “the Defendant would have smoothly agreed on the crime of quasi-rape in this case and would not raise any civil or criminal objection,” it is difficult to readily conclude that the victim’s intent not to punish the said telephone conversation was withdrawn.