The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of execution of two years, the observation of protection, and the order to attend a sexual assault treatment lecture of forty hours) of the lower court is deemed to be too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. In light of the following: (a) there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment; and (b) considering the circumstances of each of the instant crimes, the means and consequence thereof, and the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment cannot be deemed unfair; and (c) thus, the prosecutor’s aforementioned assertion is without merit.

3. As such, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da14412, Dec. 20, 201). However, in light of the last act of “registration and submission of new information” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 4th page 15 of the judgment below) and “a sex crime which causes registration of personal information under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes” and other crimes are concurrent under Article 37 of the Criminal Act and the punishment is prescribed pursuant to Article 38 of the Criminal Act. Accordingly, the period of registration of personal information resulting therefrom is 15 years under Articles 45(1)3 and 45(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (amended by Act No. 14412, Dec. 20, 2016).