The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (two years of suspended execution in six months of imprisonment, and forty hours of order to attend school) is too unreasonable;

2. The fact that there is no new circumstance or special change in circumstances that can be reflected in the sentencing after the decision of the court below was made, and there is no motive for the defendant to take into account the crime that the defendant taken off the victim in order to meet his misleading desire (the victim not only did not have any extra conflict with the defendant before becoming aware of the crime above, but also the defendant secured the payment details of sexual traffic prices in preparation for the victim's change). The demand for refund of sexual traffic prices caused by the dispute over both violence and the taking of the cell phone owned by the victim are significant causes attributable to the defendant, and the defendant continued to seek the payment of sexual traffic prices caused by both violence and the taking of the cell phone owned by the victim, the degree of the injury is unlimited, and the same records are three times, and other various sentencing conditions stated in the records are considered, it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it excessively exceeds its discretion.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. The defendant's appeal is without merit. Thus, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.