A. Defendant case (the assertion of unreasonable sentencing between both parties) 1) Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) by the lower court and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”).

(ii) the sentence sentenced by the Prosecutor against the Defendant is too unfasible and unreasonable. (ii) The sentence sentenced by the Prosecutor to the Defendant is too unfasible and unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor for attachment order request (the prosecutor), the defendant should be deemed to have a risk of repeating a crime. Therefore, the judgment below dismissing the defendant's request for attachment order against the defendant, despite the necessity of attachment of an electronic device.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s judgment of the Defendant regarding the instant case was voluntarily contacted with an investigative agency, and the Defendant took the attitude of recognizing and opposing all of his errors from the investigative agency to the court, etc. Considering the Defendant’s favorable sentencing data. The instant murder crime takes account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s act of murdering the Defendant’s spouse as a result of a defect in the purport that the victim would have a euse relationship between the Defendant and the Defendant’s spouse as a matter of dispute, such as the settlement of the relationship between the Defendant and his/her obligation and family relations; (b) the Defendant’s act of murdering the Defendant’s spouse; (c) the victim’s name appears to have been very serious mental and physical pain and fear; and (d) the victim appears to have died in extreme mental and physical pain and fear; (d) the dead body was abandoned by the Defendant after being killed of the victim; and (e) the Defendant did not reach an agreement between the Defendant and his/her bereaved family members; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and behavior means, motive, etc.