The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s punishment against the Defendants on the summary of the grounds of appeal (two years of suspended sentence for each ten-month period) is deemed unfair, and it is unreasonable for the lower court to exempt the Defendants from the disclosure order, in the absence of special circumstances that may not disclose their personal information.

2. The judgment of this case is that the defendants purchased the other party's sex, which is merely 12 years old and 13 years old, in spite of the fact that the defendants are adults and are socially responsible to protect them from becoming the counter party to the act of purchasing sex, and its nature is not good.

However, in full view of the circumstances favorable to the Defendants, such as the Defendants’ fact that the Defendants were physically divided, the Defendants’ method of purchasing sex constitutes a similar sexual act using the mouth, and the Defendants did not have any specific criminal power, and other various sentencing conditions, including the Defendants’ age, character and conduct, environment, the circumstances leading to the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, it is not deemed that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

In addition, since the Defendants did not have the past record of committing sex offenses against children and juveniles, it is difficult to view that there is a risk of repeating the Defendants against children and juveniles under the age of 13 in the future. On the other hand, even if they did not disclose the Defendants’ personal information, the lower court’s punishment and the lower court appears to have the effect of protecting children and juveniles from recidivism and from sex crimes, and therefore, the lower court’s exemption from disclosure orders with respect to the Defendants is justifiable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing against the Defendants is rejected in entirety.

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