The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

However, the period of three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentencing is too inappropriate.

B. Prosecutor 1) The Defendant was illegal to reduce the physical and mental penalty, and the lower court was unlawful to have reduced the statutory penalty due to mental and physical weakness, although he did not have any mental and physical weakness at the time of the instant crime.

2) Improper sentencing of the lower court is deemed unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Examining the record on the prosecutor’s assertion of illegality in mitigation of mental and physical weakness, the lower court, at the time of the instant crime, deemed that the Defendant had weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to Alz’s dementia diseases, etc.

The judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is an error of law as argued by the prosecutor in the judgment below.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. Considering the fact that the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim under the age of 13 and the nature of the offense, strict punishment against the Defendant is necessary.

However, when the defendant is aged 85 years old, he confessions the crime of this case and repents his mistake. The defendant does not have the same criminal record, the defendant commits the crime of this case in the state of mental and physical weakness due to Albimeric dementia disease, etc., the defendant committed the crime of this case in the state of mental and physical weakness. The defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual consent with the injured party when he was in the trial, and other conditions of sentencing specified in the arguments of this case such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., are considered as being too unreasonable. Thus, the above argument by the court below is reasonable, and the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and it is in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.