All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. As to the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, 40 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program, and 5 years of order to restrict employment), the Defendant asserts that the sentence is too unreasonable because the sentence is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the sentence is too unfeasible and unfair.

2. We examine both the judgment and the prosecutor’s respective unfair claims for sentencing.

In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment, and the sentencing of the original judgment does not exceed the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. As such, there is no new circumstance or special change in circumstances that can be reflected in the sentencing after the original judgment is rendered, and furthermore, if the lower court comprehensively takes into account the circumstances revealed in the grounds of sentencing, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, and circumstances after the crime, etc., and if it is deemed that the lower court appears to be reasonable, and that it is unfair because it is too hot or unb

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's argument are without merit.

3. In conclusion, since all appeals filed by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit, they are all dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.