All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentencing of the lower court (unfair sentencing) is inappropriate because it excessively lacks the sentencing of the Defendant (the completion of a sexual assault treatment program for two years and forty hours of imprisonment).

B. In light of the fact that the victim has a sexual relationship with the defendant under the condition that he receives money from the defendant, but there have been many times the response of refusal for the sexual intercourse, and the defendant was forced to take the weak points for the defendant on the day of the case. Although the victim expressed his intention of refusal, the defendant neglected it and expressed his intention of refusal, and even though the victim expressed his intention of refusal, the victim's resistance was sufficiently threatened even with the tangible power of the defendant's use.

Therefore, the parts of the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse should be convicted.

2) Even if the part of the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse is not guilty, the tangible force that the Defendant exercised by the victim is at least a threat of force. Thus, the crime of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (a deceptive scheme, etc.) is established, which is the preliminary charge.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor

A. The prosecutor amended the indictment as to the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse among the facts charged in his/her trial as the primary charge, and as to the name of the crime, “Indecent Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse” under Article 7(5) and (3) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse and Article 298 of the Criminal Act” under the applicable law, “The prosecutor applied for the amendment of indictment adding the same contents as the facts charged under Article 7(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse, and the court permitted this.

Therefore, although there is a change in the scope of adjudication, the prosecutor's ground of appeal is still subject to the judgment of the court.

(b) primarily;