The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, and the lecture attendance order of 40 hours for the treatment of sexual assault) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. In light of the circumstances and contents of the instant crime, etc., the crime is inferior; the frequency of the instant crime is not significant; the victim appears to have suffered a considerable mental pain due to the instant crime; the victim was not compensated for damage up to the heart; however, it is disadvantageous circumstances, such as the fact that the Defendant was receiving the judgment of the court below in the instant crime at the time of the trial and is against the Defendant; the Defendant did not have any history of criminal punishment; and other various sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments, such as the Defendant’s age and character family environment, the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, the degree of conduct, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, are considered, and thus, the Defendant’s punishment against the Defendant cannot be deemed unfair.

3. If so, the prosecutor’s appeal is without merit, and thus, it is dismissed pursuant to Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da36444, Jan. 1, 2015). In light of the reasoning of the lower judgment’s judgment’s reasoning, the phrase “as from December 12, 2015 to January 1, 2015” is obvious that “as from January 1, 2014 to January 2015, 2015,” the phrase “as such, ex officio correction is made pursuant to Article