The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s sentence (five million won in penalty) against the Defendant as to the summary of the grounds for appeal is deemed unreasonable.

2. The determination of sentencing is based on the statutory penalty, based on the discretionary determination that takes place within a reasonable and appropriate scope by taking into account the factors constituting the conditions for sentencing as prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, and there is a unique area of the first deliberation in our criminal litigation law taking the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness.

In addition, in light of these circumstances and the ex post facto in-depth nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of the discretion. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of the discretion, it is desirable to refrain from rendering a judgment of the first instance on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the scope of the discretion, but is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court determined the sentence by comprehensively taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant and the unfavorable circumstances against the Defendant, including the fact that the nature of the instant crime was inferior, and the circumstances alleged by the prosecutor on the grounds of appeal are also considered in the course of sentencing of the lower court.

It is difficult to find any change in the special sentencing condition that can change the sentence of the court below when it comes to the trial for the first time (the prosecutor denies and not reflects the defendant's act on the grounds of appeal, but the defendant recognized all of the crimes in this case at the trial for the first time). Considering the defendant's age, sexual behavior, environment, family relationship, criminal history, motive, means and consequence of the crime, various circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing as shown in the court below and the oral argument for the political party, such as the circumstance after the crime, etc., the court below's sentence against the defendant is reasonable within its discretion.