All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. On the summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor, the court below asserted that the defendant's punishment imposed by the court below (a punishment of August, 40 hours of imprisonment, orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs, confiscation) is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair.

2. There is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the original judgment because a new sentencing data has not been submitted at the trial of the original judgment. In full view of all the reasons for sentencing presented by the lower court, the sentence imposed by the Defendant is within the scope of the sentencing discretion assigned to the lower court, and it cannot be deemed that the pertinent punishment is too heavy or too unreasonable because it is too excessive.

Therefore, the argument that the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor is unfair is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

However, pursuant to Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, “1. Police Statements Investigations by G” in the column of “a summary of the evidence” column of “a summary of the evidence” of the judgment of the court below, which is obvious that it is a clerical error, shall be corrected ex officio to “1. Police Statements by G”.