Therefore, notwithstanding the provisions of Articles 21-8 and 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders, the part of the judgment of the court below concerning attachment order and protective observation order is excluded, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part of the case of the defendant.

2. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable on the gist of the grounds of appeal.

3. It is recognized that the defendant's mistake is divided, and that the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant by agreement with the victim.

However, the crime of this case is committed in violation of the victim's intent to have sexual intercourse with the victim by force after knowing the fact that the defendant was married with the victim's house with mental disorder, and the nature of the crime is not good. The crime of this case was committed in consideration of the victim's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and other conditions of sentencing specified in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable. Thus, the above assertion by the defendant is without merit.

4. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.