The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment for four months, one year of suspended sentence, and 40 hours of an order to attend a sexual assault treatment lecture) against the accused is unreasonable.

2. Each of the instant offenses requires strict punishment against the Defendant in light of the method of crime and risk, etc., by photographing screen pictures with a view to causing a sense of shame by installing a pent-type camera, after the Defendant intrudes on toilets used by the general public.

However, in full view of the fact that the Defendant had no record of criminal punishment before the instant case, that the Defendant committed a single-time crime, that is, was committed a mistake, and that there was an attitude to repent the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, occupation and family environment, the circumstances and result of the crime, etc., as well as various sentencing factors indicated in the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, occupation and family environment, the circumstances after the crime, etc., it is reasonable to determine that it is reasonable to prevent the Defendant from repeating a crime by maintaining a normal social life and attending the sexual assault therapy, and it does

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.