The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for four months, one year of suspended sentence, 40 hours of community service, and 40 hours of taking courses for sexual assault treatment) that the court below sentenced against the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. The Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim in the restaurant where the victim is working. The fact that the victim seems to have suffered a considerable sense of sexual shame, that the damage was not recovered, and that the victim wanted to feel severe punishment is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant led to the crime of this case and reflects his mistake, that there is no history of sex offense against the defendant, that there is no power to commit any crime except that which was sentenced to a fine 30 years prior to the punishment, and that the injury suffered by the victim is relatively minor is favorable to the defendant.

Considering the above circumstances and motive leading to the instant crime, the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the defendant's age, character and conduct, family relationship, environment, occupation, etc., there is no change in circumstances to determine the punishment differently from the original judgment, and the first crime (sexual crimes) within the scope of the recommended sentences of the sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Sentencing Committee (the scope of recommending punishment) shall be based on the general standard of the crime of indecent act by force (the subject of 13 years or older) and the basic area (6 months or to 2 years of imprisonment) [the scope of recommending punishment] of the second crime (the non-special person] [the scope of recommending punishment] of the mitigated area (two months or more to 1 year of imprisonment] [the scope of recommending punishment] of the mitigated area of punishment [the final sentence due to a minor aggravated multiple persons] [the standard of imprisonment between June and February, and suspension of execution, the prosecutor's assertion that the above judgment of the court below is unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.