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

A. The sentence of the lower court (12 years of imprisonment) on the part of the Defendant case is too unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable that the lower court ordered the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for 20 years, on the ground that the Defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) do not have any danger of recidivism or recidivism of sexual crimes.

2. Determination

A. As to the part of the case of the defendant, the defendant recognized the crime of this case, divided the errors, and considered the first offender as favorable to the defendant.

The crime of this case is committed on four occasions from 12 years to 14 years of age, and is committed by indecent act by force on four occasions, and the degree of rape and indecent act is very serious, in light of the method of crime number, etc., the defendant has a very poor nature of the crime; the defendant has a duty to rear and protect the victim as the two parts of the victim despite his responsibility to do so; the defendant has neglected his duty to do so; the victim has committed an indecent act by force on several occasions even after the defendant's family members have committed the crime; the victim suffers physical and mental distress which is difficult to recover; the victim expressed his intent to punish the defendant; and the victim has expressed his intent to do so.

In full view of such circumstances as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive of crime, means and result of crime, various circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as circumstances after the crime, and the result of the application of sentencing guidelines by the Supreme Court sentencing committee, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. As to the claim for attachment order, the lower court.