The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment, five years of suspended execution, etc.) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s exemption from employment restriction orders is unreasonable.

2. Determination

가. 양형부당 주장에 관하여 피고인은 며느리인 피해자가 잠을 자는 틈을 타 피해자의 음부를 혀로 핥는 등 추행하였는바, 이러한 범행은 인륜적 가치를 심하게 손상하는 파렴치한 행위로서 그 죄질이 매우 불량한 점, 피해자는 이 사건 범행으로 말미암아 극심한 정신적 충격과 신체적 고통을 겪은 것으로 보이는 점 등은 피고인에게 불리한 정상이다.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant recognized the crime of this case and is against depth, that the court below agreed with the victim, that the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant, that the defendant has no record of punishment for sexual crimes, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

In addition, in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, the appellate court is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In addition, even if comprehensively considering various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, family relationship, character and conduct, and environment, which are the conditions of sentencing, are comprehensively considered, the lower court’s punishment is deemed unreasonable.

The prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of exemption from employment restriction orders, the lower court, based on the fact that the Defendant has no history of criminal punishment for sex crimes, and the Defendant’s risk of recommitting a sex offense against an unspecified female, may have the effect of preventing the Defendant from repeating the offense, solely on the registration of personal information on the Defendant, and attending sexual assault treatment lectures.