The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 80,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (5 million won of a fine and 40 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. The judgment below seems to have sentenced the above punishment by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the defendant (the defendant's conduct is dead and reflective. No history of punishment exists. Occupational stress appears to have caused the occurrence of the instant crime, and received commendation. No punishment shall be imposed under the agreement with the victim B (the victim). The family members and persons of the defendant want to be able to have a prior position; the defendant's family members and persons wished to have a prior position) and unfavorable circumstances (the defendant's correction officer dismissed this part as a corrective public official, and taken pictures and videos which make it possible for the victimized women to feel a sense of sexual humiliation).

However, the defendant was appointed as a correctional officer in around 2006 and served in good faith for about 15 years, and around December 20, 2019, the defendant was subject to a disposition of suspension from office for the crime of this case, and the defendant was exposed to the victim B of the last crime of this case, and actively cooperateed with the investigation by voluntarily submitting a cell phone to the investigation agency, such as voluntary submission of a cell phone, etc. Accordingly, all of the remaining crimes are revealed; the contents of the crime of this case are comprehensively taken by the victims; the victims except the victim of the last crime of this case are not exposed to face, and the victim's identity was not revealed during the investigation process; the defendant did not transmit photographs to others; the defendant did not cause any additional damage due to continuous consultation from April 30, 201 to December 12, 2019; and the defendant did not cause any additional damage.