The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court’s sentence (the 300,000 won suspended sentence) on the summary of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. The Defendant alleged that the instant crime was committed in an attempted attempt by cutting the fat, and that the Defendant did not deny and reflect the relevant crime. However, the Defendant stopped at the place where the fat was in the said fat, and submitted to the court below the CD containing the image of the said fat, in order to keep the said fat from being towed at the rate of the fat at which the said fat was combined (see, e.g., the video of the CCTV image CD), and (i) if the Defendant had the said fat, carried the said fat onto his own body, and submitted it to the court below (see, e.g., the investigation record, the video of the CCTV image CD), the Defendant did not need to cut the said fat with the aforementioned fat, and (ii) in light of the fact that the Defendant did not temporarily fat the said fat at the place where the fatat was in the said fatat, the Defendant did not have any other reason to attract the said fat to his own fat, etc.

The defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the fact that the crime of this case was committed in the attempted crime, the defendant agreed with the victim and thus the victim did not want the punishment against the defendant, the defendant is a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act around 1985, and the defendant is a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act on around 1985, and the violation of the Illegal Check Control Act on around 199 and has no record of criminal punishment.

In full view of such circumstances as well as the motive, means, and consequence of the commission of the crime, and all of the sentencing conditions in the instant case, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, and environment, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair and unfair.