All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentencing (unfair sentencing) of the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”) is unreasonable as it is excessively unreasonable for the following reasons: (a) the period of suspension of execution in one year and six months; (b) the period of lectures to treat sexual assault with forty hours; and (c) the period of community service with 160 hours.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (unfair sentencing) is unreasonable as it is too unhued.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, based on the discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, and there is a unique area of the first deliberation in our criminal litigation law taking the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness.

In addition, in light of these circumstances and the ex post facto in-depth nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of the discretion. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of the discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court by destroying the first instance judgment solely on the ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the scope of the discretion, but is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court sentenced the above sentence to the Defendant on the grounds of the sentencing stated in its reasoning, including the confession of the Defendant and the first offense committed by the Defendant, who has no criminal history, and the victim and the victim are children and juveniles, and the degree of the offense committed in the first instance court’s reasonable discretion and the judgment of the lower court, taking into account the aforementioned circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s evidence.

No. 3.