The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal (the suspension of the execution of six months and the suspension of the execution of six months and the suspension of the lecture for treatment of sexual assault for forty hours) is unreasonable.

2. The Defendant was operated by himself.

At the entrance of the DVD toilet, upon finding out the fact that the victim was coming to the toilet while the victim was coming to the toilet, drawing the victim, and trying to kis, the crime is not good in light of the circumstances and contents of the crime, and the victim seems to have considerable sexual humiliation and mental impulse, and the defendant does not seem to have a strong attitude of reflection while denying the crime continuously up to the trial, and the defendant does not seem to have reached an agreement with the victim as well as the intention of the victim, and the victim also wishes to punish the defendant, it is true that there is a need for more strict punishment against the defendant.

However, the defendant has no record of being punished for the same crime, and the fact that he has no special record is favorable to the defendant in addition to being punished twice by a fine.

Comprehensively taking account of the circumstances unfavorable or favorable to such defendant and all the sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, such as the age, sex, environment, family relationship, motive and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is within the scope of the sentencing discretion assigned to the court below, and it cannot be deemed unfair because the punishment imposed by the defendant is too uneasible.

Therefore, the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is not accepted.

3. Accordingly, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is groundless.