The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the punishment (the amount of three million won in punishment, the completion of sexual assault treatment programs for forty hours in 40 hours) declared by the court below against the defendant is too uneased.

2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As no new data on sentencing have been submitted in the first instance court, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s judgment, and circumstances for which the prosecutor alleged as grounds for sentencing were already reflected in the lower court’s sentencing grounds, the degree of conduct is deemed to have been reflected in the lower court’s sentencing grounds; the Defendant is the primary offender; the Defendant is the primary offender; the Defendant is the primary offender; the Defendant’s age, sex behavior, degree of damage, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and the circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion by deeming the lower court’s sentencing so far as it is too unfilled.

Therefore, prosecutor's assertion 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.