The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is that of the lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment with prison labor for six months, one year of suspended sentence, and 40 hours of an order to attend a sexual assault treatment lecture) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In a case where there is no change in the terms and 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, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The extent of the instant indecent act is not easy, the victim did not agree with the victim, and the victim sought punishment against the Defendant is disadvantageous.

However, the fact that the defendant has no record of committing the same crime and has no record of criminal punishment exceeding the fine is favorable.

The court below determined a punishment in consideration of the above circumstances, and there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the court below because new sentencing data unfavorable to the defendant have not been submitted in the court below.

In light of the fact that the Defendant has committed a crime in the course of the trial for the sentencing of the lower court in light of various circumstances, including the Defendant’s criminal history, age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentencing of the lower court is deemed appropriate, and it is not deemed that it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, as it is excessively uneasible.

The prosecutor's assertion is not accepted.

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.