In addition, each appeal filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor shall be dismissed.

A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, etc.) against the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) is unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is unreasonable as it is unhutiled.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s judgment on the part of the Defendant case is 14 years old at the time of the crime as a minor victim C and February 2005 as a child of a female who is in a teaching relationship with himself/herself.

The judgment below

The victim C's age (15 years) stated in the text appears to be a clerical error.

The names of victims of more than E are two.

(hereinafter the same shall apply)

The crime of attempted indecent act or forced indecent act committed against E was committed, and E sent text messages that cause sexual humiliation and aversion.

Although the defendant committed several sex offenses against the victims of a minor even though he/she is in the period of repeated crimes according to the different types of criminal records at the time of the above crimes, it seems that the defendant's awareness of compliance and statement are weak.

The mother of the victims complained against the Defendant, but it appears that it was derived from the consideration of his relationship with the Defendant and his own awareness, and the victims expressed their intention to punish the Defendant in a sense that they correctly recognize the legal and social meaning of punishment not for the damage inflicted by the Defendant, while recognizing the legal and social meaning of punishment not for the damage inflicted by the Defendant.

It is insufficient to evaluate.

On the other hand, the Defendant recognized all of the instant crimes.

The degree of indecent act committed by the defendant against the victim C is weak for the crime of indecent act committed by the defendant.

There are special mitigation factors according to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court when the exercise of tangible power is significantly weak.

The crime of attempted indecent act against victim E was committed in a number of times the indecent act was committed.

In addition, the judgment of the court below is based on sentencing.