Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: On this appeal from a judgment convicting him of two counts of endangering the welfare of a child (Penal Law § 260.10), defendant contends that the jury verdicts are repugnant. That contention, however, has not been preserved because it was not raised prior to the discharge of the jury (see, People v. Satloff, 56 N.Y.2d 745, 746; People v. Paz, 159 A.D.2d 987, 988, lv denied 76 N.Y.2d 793; People v. Carey, 151 A.D.2d 989, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 806). In any event, that contention lacks merit because defendant's acquittal on the two counts of sexual abuse in the second degree (Penal Law § 130.60), as charged to the jury, was not "conclusive as to a necessary element of the other crime, as charged, for which the guilty verdict was rendered" (People v. Tucker, 55 N.Y.2d 1, 7; see also, People v. Loughlin, 76 N.Y.2d 804).