The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (a punishment of imprisonment for three years, a stay of execution for four years, and an order to attend a sexual assault treatment lecture for 120 hours) is too unfluent and unfair, and it is also erroneous to exempt the disclosure and notification order.

2. The lower court’s sentencing judgment that deemed the primary sentencing factor in terms of the nature and background of the instant crime, the Defendant’s reflective and criminal records, and an agreement with the victim, etc. in full view of the factors and guidelines for sentencing revealed in the course of the lower court’s sentencing deliberation, exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

It can not be assessed, and there is no circumstance or material that can be deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the court below in the course of the deliberation of the sentencing of the party.

In addition, the court below exempted the defendant from the order of disclosure and notification after recognizing a special circumstance that may not disclose or notify personal information on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In light of relevant evidence, pleading, legal doctrine, etc., the above judgment of the court below is just and there is no error such as misconception of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, etc.

3. Accordingly, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act).