All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

In light of the overall circumstances of this case, the punishment imposed by the court below (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, etc.) is too heavy or unreasonable.

Judgment

Although the Defendant is in profoundly against each of the crimes of this case and is the most favorable condition for supporting two children, such as the fact that there is no record of criminal punishment, the Defendant’s punishment, but on the other hand, it seriously infringes upon another’s privacy and the peace of residence by photographing a residence intrusion or a camera, etc., which did not reach an agreement with the victim, and the community service order was issued to the Defendant to have a special preventive effect, and the order to attend a course for sexual crimes was necessary, and all of the sentencing conditions such as the Defendant’s age, family relation, criminal record relation, character and conduct, environment, means and method of the crime, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed to be reasonable, and the Defendant’s sentence imposed by the Defendant and the prosecutor’s allegation of unfair sentencing is not deemed to be too heavy or unreasonable.

In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[However, the part of the judgment of the court below under the "Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes" is an erroneous entry of the "Special Act on the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes", and the "proviso of Article 62-2 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Act" in the "Act on Probation and Social Service Order and Order to Attend Education" is obviously an error entry of "Article 62-2 (1) and (2) of the Criminal Act", and it is obvious that it is an error entry of "Article 62-2 (1) and