The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below rendered a judgment ordering the Defendant to observe the protection for two years from the date the execution of the sentence was completed with respect to the part of the case where the Defendant was found guilty, and the part of the case where the order to observe the protection was issued, and the prosecutor appealed only for the reason that the sentencing was unfair. Thus, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and the Electronic Monitoring, this part is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.

2. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant and the claimant for the observation order (hereinafter “defendants”) (a punishment of imprisonment with prison labor for three years and eight hours and orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs for eight hours) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

3. In light of the fact that the sentencing is made within a reasonable and appropriate scope by comprehensively taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing under Article 51 of the Criminal Act based on the statutory penalty, and the fact that the sentencing is made within an appellate court’s ex post facto nature, etc., it is reasonable to respect the first instance judgment in a case where there is no change in the conditions for sentencing compared to the first instance judgment, and the first instance judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Even though the first instance judgment is within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the sentence differs from the appellate court’s opinion, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ from the first instance judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In addition, the lower court committed the crime of this case under the influence of alcohol by the Defendant to have sexual intercoursed victims, despite having a huge mental impulse and sexual humiliation.