The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, it is unreasonable to exempt the lower court from the disclosure and notification order, as well as the unduly unfasible sentence (two years of suspended sentence for one year, and 40 hours of sexual assault treatment lectures) in light of the gist of the grounds for appeal in this case.

2. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the instant crime was committed by force twice by hand against the victim, who is a juvenile under the age of 15, who was under the age of 15, who borrowed the tea from the street, and the victim, who has not yet been physically and physically mature, seems to have suffered a considerable sexual humiliation and mental shock, and the Defendant is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the degree and degree of conduct of the defendant's use of force against the victim is not much serious, and the fact that there is no other force of criminal punishment except for the punishment of fine three times for the crime of double-class, etc. are favorable to the defendant.

As above, comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments of this case, such as the motive and background of the crime in this case, the means and consequence of the crime in this case, the circumstances before and after the crime, the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, family relations, economic circumstances, etc. Furthermore, the court below appears to have sentenced two years of suspended execution, etc. to one year of imprisonment within the recommended range (one year or two years of imprisonment) set out in the sentencing guidelines, taking into account these sentencing conditions equally, and the court below appears to have sentenced two years of suspended execution, etc. of one year of imprisonment within the recommended range (one year or two years of imprisonment) set forth in the sentencing guidelines. The court below did not have any special circumstances or circumstances to change the sentence in the first instance court, and it appears that even if imposing the defendant a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for 40 hours added to the order to undergo sexual assault treatment, the court below's sentence can sufficiently take special preventive measures.