The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The trial scope of this Court: (a) partially accepted the part of the application for compensation by the applicant for compensation; (b) the Defendant filed an appeal against the lower judgment and deemed to have appealed to the part of the compensation order pursuant to Article 33(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings by filing an appeal against the lower judgment; (c) the Defendant did not assert the grounds for appeal regarding the part of the award of compensation order; (d) even if ex officio examination, the part of the lower court’s compensation order

2. The lower court’s sentence (8 months of imprisonment) against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds of appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

3. The grounds for sentencing alleged by the Defendant in the trial at the lower court appear to have been considered in the sentencing at the lower court. In full view of the various circumstances indicated in the records and the theory of changes, including the Defendant’s age, sexual behavior, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstance after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed unfair on account of the absence of any new circumstance that may be considered in the sentencing after the sentence of the lower court, the conditions for sentencing compared to the first instance court do not change, and the first instance sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015).

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

4. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.