The part of the judgment of the first instance and the judgment of the second instance as to the crimes in the 2018 Highest 6832 of the judgment shall be reversed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months, 2: 2: 2018 Godan6832 as stated in the judgment below) asserts that the defendant is too unreasonable as to the punishment imposed by each court below (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor for 6 months and 2019 Godan2586 as stated in the judgment of the court below, and the completion of sexual assault treatment programs and employment restriction orders for 20 months and 40 hours as stated in the judgment of the court below), and the prosecutor asserts that the above punishment imposed by the court of first instance is too unreasonable

2. We examine ex officio the part of the judgment of the first instance court and the judgment of the second instance as to the crime of 2018 Godan6832 decided.

The first and second original judgments against the defendant were pronounced, and the prosecutor filed an appeal against the first and second original judgment against the defendant, and this court decided to hold concurrent hearings with respect to each of the above appellate cases. Since each of the crimes of the first and second original judgment against the defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and each of the crimes against the second and second original judgment against the defendant is concurrent crimes under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, one of the crimes against the defendant is sentenced under Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act, so the first and second original judgment cannot be maintained as they are.

3. Of the judgment of the court below of the second instance, the second instance court’s judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing regarding the part on the crime of 2019 high-class 2586 case seems to have determined the punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the Defendant’s sentencing, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the second instance judgment since no new data on sentencing have been submitted at the trial. Considering the circumstances as stated by the second instance court, considering the form of the instant crime, the motive and background of the instant crime, the circumstances after the instant crime, etc., the second instance judgment’

Therefore, the defendant's unfair sentencing on this part is inappropriate.