The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentencing of the court below is too uncomfortable.

2. The instant crime requires strict punishment against the Defendant, in light of the following: (a) the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim who is a child or juvenile, and the nature of the offense is not good; and (b) the Defendant did not agree with the victim up to the trial of the party.

However, the fact that the defendant repents his mistake, that the defendant was a person with a disability of class 3 with intellectual disability without the same criminal record, that the defendant was also sentenced to the suspension of execution of imprisonment with prison labor, that there was no change in the conditions of sentencing and that the sentencing of the court below exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

In addition, considering the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below cannot be deemed unfair because the defendant's punishment is too uneasible, and thus, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (Article 47(1) and Article 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes on the ground that the “Article 47(1) and Article 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes” in Article 3 of the judgment below is a clerical error, and the judgment of the court below