The judgment below

The part of the case of the defendant is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

except that this shall not apply.

1. The court below rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request regarding the part of the case against which the defendant was found guilty and the part of the case for which the request to attach an attachment order was filed, and there is no benefit of appeal regarding the part for which the request to attach an attachment order was

Therefore, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, the part of the judgment below regarding the request for attachment order among the judgment below is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court. Thus, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part of the case of

2. In light of the summary of the grounds for appeal in this case’s sentencing conditions, the punishment imposed by the court below (a period of eight months of imprisonment and 40 hours of completion of a sexual assault treatment program) is so excessive that it is unfair (a defendant has partially contacted with a victim during the process of setting the best and several guidelines in the grounds for appeal, but there was no intention to commit an indecent act, and it was merely an expression of her chest or tran in a somewhat exaggeration or friendly manner. However, although the defendant argued that he did not have any intention to commit an indecent act, he/she would not have any intention to commit an indecent act, he/she would not have any intention to commit an indecent act. However, he/she revoked the above argument to the effect that misunderstanding of facts at the first trial date of the trial of the first instance, and arranged to dispute only unfair sentencing on the grounds of appeal. This argument does not constitute legitimate grounds for appeal

3. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the instant crime committed by the Defendant committed an indecent act on nine occasions against the victim, who is an employee of the shop shop operated by him. The Defendant, who repeatedly committed an indecent act by taking advantage of his superior position as an employer, committed an indecent act against the victim who is the socially weak for a long time, and committed an indecent act by gathering the victimized person as well as the place of business.