The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (one million won of fine, and forty hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unhued and unreasonable.

Despite the fact that the seized mobile phone of this case (Tgu District Prosecutors' Office No. 1993, 2014; hereinafter "the cell phone of this case") is an object of confiscation as an object of criminal act, the court below erred by omitting the sentence of confiscation.

2. Determination

A. The crime of this case on the assertion of unfair sentencing cannot be deemed to be less severe than that of the defendant taking pictures of a part against women that may cause sexual convictions.

Since damage recovery or the agreement with the victim has not reached, it is recognized that the necessity for the strict punishment of the defendant is recognized.

However, the defendant recognized the error of the crime of this case and is in profoundly against it.

There is no same criminal history for the defendant, and there is no history of criminal punishment.

In addition, in full view of the motive and circumstances leading to the instant crime, the frequency of the instant crime, the circumstances before and after the instant crime, the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, etc. and all the sentencing conditions shown in the pleadings, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair because it is too uneasible.

B. As the confiscation under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act, the judgment on the assertion of confiscation is discretionary, the issue of whether to confiscate even an article that meets the requirement of confiscation is left to the court's discretion, except for the restriction by the proportionality principle applied to the general penal law.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do15805, May 24, 2013). The instant mobile phone used in the Defendant’s photographing is an object provided to a criminal act; however, the mobile phone is not an object used to commit the instant criminal act; the given mobile phone is not an object used to remove a photograph file from the seized mobile phone; and it is not easy to recover the file; and the Defendant is a primary offender who has no record of the same kind of crime and is again committing the instant crime