All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. The lower court rejected the application for compensation filed by the applicant for compensation, and the applicant for compensation cannot file an objection against the judgment dismissing the application for compensation pursuant to Article 32(4) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. Therefore, the part dismissing the application for compensation order was immediately finalized.

Therefore, among the judgment below, the rejection of the above compensation order is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.

2. As to the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) by the lower court, the Defendant asserts that the Defendant is too unreasonable, and that the prosecutor is too unfeasible and unfair.

3. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it in the appellate court (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Based on the foregoing legal doctrine, the lower court, based on the foregoing, determined the sentence by taking account of various circumstances as stated in its reasoning.

In the first instance court, the Defendant appears to have repaid a sum of KRW 3.8 million to the victim. However, in light of the extent of damage, it is difficult to view that there is a new circumstance to change the sentence of the lower court, and there is no other new circumstance. In addition, considering all sentencing factors indicated in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing was too heavy or unhued and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

It does not appear.

Therefore, the defendant and the prosecutor's argument are without merit.

4. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act (Provided, That the "Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution of 1. Execution (hereinafter referred to as "the circumstances favorable to the reasons for sentencing") of the judgment of the court below is obvious, and therefore, it is obvious that the "Article 62(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is erroneous."