The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentencing of the court below is too uncomfortable.

2. The instant crime requires strict punishment against the Defendant, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant raped the victim who was in a drinking house and inflicted an injury requiring approximately six weeks’ medical treatment; and (b) the nature of the relevant crime is not good; and (c) the Defendant inflicted considerable mental suffering and pain on the victim due to the instant crime.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant repents his wrong facts, the defendant does not have the same criminal record, the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant by agreement with the victim, the defendant is sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment with prison labor, protection observation and attending order together with the suspension of execution, and other circumstances of sentencing specified in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the court below's punishment cannot be deemed to be unfair because it is too uneasible, and the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and Article 16(2) main text of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes). However, “The main text of Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes is obvious that it is a clerical error in Article 16(4) and the main text of Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.”