The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentencing of the lower court (three years of suspended execution in two years and six months of imprisonment, and twenty-four hours of order to attend a course) is deemed to be too unhued and unreasonable.

2. In light of the fact that an indecent act committed by the defendant, such as deceiving the chest of a victim who is related to the defendant, is not good, the prosecutor's assertion that it is necessary to punish the defendant strictly is reasonable.

However, considering the fact that the Defendant made confessions of all the instant crimes and reflects on the nature of the indecent act, the degree of indecent act is relatively not severe, the instant crime appears to be contingent, the victim and the mother of the victim submit a letter of revocation of complaint, the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment other than the fine imposed as a violation of the Road Traffic Act around 1990, the victim’s withdrawal of complaint and the current living relationship, etc. as indicated in the result of the sentencing investigation conducted in the court below, it is difficult to view that the lower court’s sentencing, which sentenced the suspension of execution within the scope of recommended punishment (two years and six months to four years and six months) according to the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Commission, is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

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