The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable because the punishment imposed by the lower court (five years of imprisonment, five years of suspended sentence, 80 hours of attending the sexual assault treatment course, and 5 years of disclosure of information and notification) is too uneased.

2. The crime of this case requires strict punishment of the Defendant considering the following facts: (a) the Defendant, a juvenile who was aware of the Defendant’s mobile phone fluoring, attempted to engage in rape in the telecom; (b) the Defendant attempted to commit rape in the telecom; (c) the victim’s resistance was serious; and (d) the victim, a juvenile, appears to have suffered considerable mental pain due to the crime of this case, appears to have undergone considerable mental pain.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized the mistake of the Defendant, and the victim was the Defendant’s wife by mutual agreement with the victim; (b) the Defendant committed the instant crime even if it was committed; and (c) the Defendant was the primary offender; and (d) other various sentencing conditions specified in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, and circumstances after the commission of the instant crime; (b) the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable; and

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.