In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

A. The sentence of the lower court on the part of the Defendant case is too unreasonable.

B. The attachment period of the lower court in the part of the attachment order case is too unfair.

2. Determination

A. Although the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) do not have the same criminal history, the crime of this case is deemed unfair in light of the following: (a) the fact that the Defendant continuously committed an indecent act and sexual intercourse with the victim under the age of 13; (b) the mother of the victim and the victim wished to punish the Defendant; and (c) the overall sentencing conditions indicated in the argument of this case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court, etc., the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. In full view of the contents of the instant crime and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is not recognized that the period of attachment by the lower court is too excessive and unreasonable.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 35 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.