All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, the suspension of execution of four years, etc.) is too unreasonable and unfair. 2) Although there are special circumstances under which disclosure and notification of the personal information of the unjust accused under the disclosure and notification order should not be disclosed or restricted on employment, it is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to disclose and notify the personal information.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Compared to the judgment of the court below on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the defendant and prosecutor, where there is no change in the sentencing conditions, and the sentencing of the court below is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015 (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court rendered a sentence against the Defendant by taking into account (i) the following factors: (i) the Defendant recognized the instant crime; (ii) the Defendant committed the instant crime; (iii) the Defendant’s refusal to commit the instant crime; (iv) the Defendant’s age, character, conduct, environment, motive of the crime, and circumstances after committing the crime; (iv) the Defendant committed similar rape against the victim who is physically mixed; and (v) the Defendant was not guilty of having committed a considerable sense of shame and mental suffering; and (v) the Defendant appears to have been punished for sexual assault around 2006, taking into account the following factors: (v) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior; and (v) the Defendant’s motive and circumstances after committing the crime.

When comprehensively considering the conditions of sentencing, sentencing criteria, etc. specified in the sentencing review process of the lower court, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s judgment exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

Furthermore, the defendant and the prosecutor are different.