The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (an order to suspend the execution of imprisonment with prison labor for not less than four months, and an order to attend a sexual assault treatment lecture for not more than twenty-four hours) is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. In light of the fact that the victim has received a considerable mental impulse, that the victim has failed to agree with the victim, that there was a fine on several occasions due to the violation of traffic laws (driving) and the crime of injury on the road, that there was a history of having been sentenced to a suspended sentence of four months by imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of violating traffic laws (unlicensed driving) around 2008, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant.

However, in full view of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime and divided, there is no history of punishment for the same kind of crime, the video recorded appears to have not been leaked to the outside, and other sentencing circumstances that are shown in the records and arguments, including the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance of the instant crime, means and consequence, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is too uneasy and unreasonable.

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 appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.