A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

51 days of detention before pronouncement of the judgment of the court below shall be included in the above sentence.

The appeal regarding the attachment order case of the person whose attachment order is requested shall be dismissed in the judgment below.

The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the remainder of the facts charged regarding the instant case except for the violation of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Juvenile Rape, etc.), and sentenced the Defendant to two years and six months, and sentenced the Defendant to two years and two years, and dismissed the prosecution regarding the violation of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Juvenile

As to the judgment of the court below, the defendant appealed against the conviction portion on the ground of unfair sentencing, and the prosecutor did not file an appeal.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the defendant case of this case, which dismissed public prosecution of this case, is separated and finalized by the prosecutor's failure to file an appeal. Thus, the judgment of this court is limited to the guilty part

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Part of the defendant's case

In light of the following: (a) the Defendant and the person subject to the request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”), the background leading to the instant crime, the possibility of improving the Defendant, and the deposit of KRW 7 million at the lower court for the victim; and (b) additional deposit of KRW 10 million in the first instance court, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant (long-term two years and six months of imprisonment, and the short-term two years) is too unreasonable.

B. Part of the attachment order case

Since the defendant's crime of this case is an contingent crime, the judgment of the court below ordering the defendant to attach an electronic tracking device despite the absence of a risk of recidivism is erroneous and has affected the conclusion of the judgment.

3. Determination

A. Part of the defendant's case

Before determining the grounds for appeal on the unfair sentencing of the defendant, the health unit and the defendant, on January 3, 1990, fall under the juvenile under Article 2 of the Juvenile Act at the time of the decision of the court below and sentenced an irregular term of punishment. However, in the case of the judgment of the court below, the defendant must be sentenced to a regular term of punishment because it is apparent that he/she has attained majority, and due to the above reasons, the part of the judgment of the court below concerning the defendant

B. Part of the attachment order case

In light of all the circumstances revealed in the trial process, such as the character and conduct of the defendant, the motive and method of the crime of this case, and the circumstances after the crime, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the Defendant’s appeal as to the part of the attachment order case in the judgment below is without merit. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed pursuant to Article 35 of the Act on the Attachment of Electronic Monitoring System for Specific Sexual Offenders and Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the part of the judgment of the court below concerning the Defendant’s case is reversed ex officio as to the Defendant’s case, and the decision of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the argument of unfair sentencing, and it is again decided as follows (However, since it is apparent that the case name of the court below was omitted by mistake, this is added ex officio in accordance with Article

Articles 12 and 8-2(1) of the former Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims Thereof (Amended by Act No. 9110, Jun. 13, 2008); Article 297 of the Criminal Act (Attempted Rape); Article 257(1) of the Criminal Act (Bodily Injury and Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act (within the scope of the sum of the long-term punishments of the above two crimes)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act

1. Determination of sentence (Application of the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous alteration);

As the statutory punishment against the defendant is imprisonment with prison labor for not less than five years, so long as the adult defendant was unable to reduce juvenile offenses at the time when the judgment of the court below was rendered, even if mitigation is made, the defendant shall be sentenced to imprisonment for not less than two years and six months, but the defendant only filed an appeal, which shall be sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a short term of not less than two years and six years, in accordance

1. Inclusion of days of detention in detention;

Article 57 of the Criminal Act

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Cho Jong-sung (Presiding Judge)