All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The defendant asserts that, with respect to the punishment (7 million won in punishment, and 40 hours in completion of sexual assault treatment programs) of the original judgment, the defendant is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair.

2. In light of the following circumstances: (a) the judgment was based on the following facts: (b) the Defendant recognized the Defendant’s mistake, recognized the Defendant’s primary offense; (c) the first offender; (d) the victims and only agreed with the victims that they want not to punish the Defendant; and (c) the family members to support the instant forced indecent act; (d) the victim is a female who is the victim of the instant indecent act; and (e) the victim’s three working behaviors or asked the victim to inflict an injury; and (e) the case is disadvantageous.

In full view of all the above sentencing factors, considering the Defendant’s age, sex, career, family relation, economic situation, background and motive leading up to the commission of the crime, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and other factors pertaining to the sentencing indicated in the records and arguments on the change of circumstances, the judgment of the court below’s punishment is deemed appropriate and there is no change of circumstances to be considered in the trial, and thus the Defendant and the Prosecutor’s assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (if a crime of forced indecent act committed in the judgment below, which is a sex offense subject to registration of new information, becomes final and conclusive, the defendant becomes a person subject to registration of personal information under Article 42(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and is obligated to submit personal information to the competent authority pursuant to Article 43 of the same Act, taking into account the statutory punishment, the nature of the crime, the circumstances leading to the aggravation of concurrent crimes, etc. of each of the crimes in this case, the judgment of the court below that did not regard the period of registration of personal information under Article 45(4) of the