Therefore, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 9 (8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the attachment order is excluded, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part of the case of the defendant.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the grounds of the victim's statement that is not reliable, although the defendant did not have committed an indecent act or rape by force against the victim who is a friendly parent. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. The Defendant also asserted that the judgment of the court below on the assertion of mistake of fact is identical to the assertion of mistake of the above facts, and the court below rejected the above assertion in detail by examining the judgment on the assertion.

In light of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, the judgment of the court below is justified, and this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

B. It is recognized that the defendant has partially divided his or her mistake with respect to the determination of the unfair argument of sentencing.

However, the defendant again committed the crime of this case during the period of probation, and the crime of this case committed by the defendant by coercioning the victim who is a relative to twice through rape and assault, which is not good to the nature of the crime. The crime of this case showed considerable mental suffering and pain to the victim due to the crime of this case, and the punishment shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sexual behavior and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime.