The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

For the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment (ten months of imprisonment and 80 hours of completion of a sexual assault treatment program) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant and the person for whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In the part of the Defendant case, it is unreasonable for the lower court to dismiss the Defendant’s request to attach an attachment order against the Defendant, where the risk of repeating a crime of sexual assault exists due to the habition of sexual assault crime.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of unreasonable sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor, the instant crime is highly likely to be subject to criticism by forcing the Defendant, a subordinate employee, to commit an indecent act by force.

Accordingly, the victim seems to have suffered sexual humiliation and mental impulse.

However, the defendant made a confession of the crime in the trial, and reflects the mistake.

In the first instance, there is a smooth agreement with the victim, and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant.

In addition, when comprehensively considering the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, background, means and consequence of the crime, various sentencing conditions shown in the arguments in this case, such as the circumstances after the crime, and the scope of the sentencing guidelines set forth in the sentencing guidelines set by the Supreme Court, the applicable sentencing guidelines for imprisonment of not less than one month but not more than ten years (the subject of the age of not less than 13) shall be applied according to the general standards for the crime of indecent act by force (the subject of the age of not less than 13) and the subject of mitigation [the decision on the recommended area] mitigated area (the subject of special mitigation: the subject of the recommendation area] [the scope of the punishment [the subject of the recommendation] and imprisonment of not more

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified and the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

B. As to the argument that the prosecutor dismissed the prosecutor’s request for attachment order, the lower court determined as follows.