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

Therefore, the part of the case in which the defendant and the person subject to the request for attachment order (hereinafter “the defendant”) have interests in filing an appeal against the part regarding the request for attachment order by the court below, and only the defendant appealed, the part regarding the request for attachment order by the court below pursuant to Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders is also subject to the scope of the judgment

However, the Defendant only contests the part of the lower judgment’s case based on the grounds of appeal, and does not explicitly indicate his intention to claim the part regarding the case for which the lower judgment’s request for attachment order was filed, and there is no reason to deem that the attachment order issued by the lower court is unreasonable. Therefore, the lower court’s judgment should be examined as to the

In addition, notwithstanding Article 9 (8) of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, the part of the request for probation order which is dismissed by the prosecutor's request in the original trial is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court, as there

2. The gist of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable that the original court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable;

3. The lower court: (a) under the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, given that the Defendant committed the instant crime while having a history of sex offense up to five times and attaching an electronic tracking device therefrom; (b) under the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, the Defendant recognized the crime and agreed with the victim that the victim was not punished, taking into account the circumstances favorable to the Defendant; and (c) based on the Defendant’s age, character, conduct, environment, and crime.