The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower judgment’s sentencing (an imprisonment of two years and six months, and an order to complete sexual assault treatment program 80 hours) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. The sentencing on the basis of a statutory penalty is a discretionary judgment that takes into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act within a reasonable and appropriate scope, on the basis of the statutory penalty.

However, considering the unique area of sentencing in the first instance that is respected under the principle of trial priority and the principle of direct jurisdiction in our criminal litigation law and the nature of the ex post facto review of the appellate court, the first instance sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion when comprehensively considering the factors and sentencing criteria in the course of the first instance sentencing trial.

In light of the records newly discovered in the course of the appellate court’s sentencing hearing, it is reasonable to file an unfair judgment of the first instance court, only in cases where it is deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the first instance court as it is for the court to judge the sentencing of the first instance court.

Unless there exist such exceptional circumstances, it is desirable to respect the sentencing of the first instance judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court sentenced the above sentence to the Defendant with due regard to the sentencing stated in its reasoning. The circumstances cited by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are the circumstances that the Defendant committed on the grounds of appeal, such as the following: (a) the Defendant committed an indecent act or similar act three times against her friendly kys victim; (b) the Defendant committed the crime by committing an indecent act or similar act; (c) the nature of the crime is extremely poor; and (d) the victim seems to suffer a long time mental pain due to the instant case, are the circumstances that the lower court already

In addition, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing to be newly taken into account in the trial.

Therefore, since the judgment of the court below cannot be deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing of the court below.