The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds of appeal (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of execution of two years, community service hours, 80 hours, and 24 hours of sexual assault treatment lectures) is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. In light of the circumstances and contents of each of the crimes of this case, such as the insult and coercion of the victim, the Defendant’s liability for the crime is not somewhat weak, but has not been taken against the victim, and the past criminal punishment has been taken up to tens, etc., which are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized his mistake and against himself; (b) deposited KRW 3.8 million for the victim; (c) supported the wife suffering from lebane disease; and (d) the Defendant’s age, sex, family environment, motive and circumstance of the crime; (b) the means and consequence of the crime; and (c) comprehensively considered various sentencing factors in the process of the trial and records, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and thus, the prosecutor’s allegation above is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the prosecutor's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, however, Article 25 of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure provides that "the pertinent provision on criminal facts" of Article 3, 5 of the Enforcement Rule on the Criminal Procedure shall be dismissed as "the pertinent provision on the criminal facts and the choice of punishment", and Article 3, 7 of the Enforcement Rule on the Criminal Procedure shall be corrected to add "each choice of imprisonment" to "the addition of each