The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months.

Defendant

A.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because it is too unreasonable to apply to each punishment (one year of imprisonment with prison labor and two years of imprisonment with prison labor) declared by the court below to the defendants.

2. Determination

A. We examine the reasoning for ex officio appeal as to Defendant B’s ground for appeal.

Article 3(1) and 2(1)3 of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (Amended by Act No. 13718, Jan. 6, 2016); Article 2(1)1 of the Criminal Act; Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act shall apply to the facts constituting an offense described in Article 3(1) of the judgment against Defendant B.

In this regard, Article 3 (1) of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act was deleted as the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. was promulgated and enforced by Act No. 13718 on January 6, 2016, and Article 3 (1) of the former Punishment of Violences, etc. Act was deleted. Since this is deemed to be an amendment of the Act based on the reflective consideration that the previous sentencing was too serious because it has lost its legitimacy and balance in the punishment system, the Act on the Punishment of Violences, etc. cannot be applied to the above facts charged, and more punishment is subject to special crimes under the minor Criminal Act, and the part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant is no longer maintained.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, all of the crimes of this case are recognized by the Defendant, and they are against their mistakes, and the victims and victims do not want punishment by agreement with the victims are favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant can have a record of criminal punishment including punishment imposed on the same kind of crime, and the crime of repeating during the period of repeated crime is disadvantageous to the defendant.

Considering such circumstances as above, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime, and various circumstances that are the sentencing as shown in the instant records and arguments, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too excessive.