In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

The court below asserts that with respect to the punishment (a maximum of seven years of imprisonment, and a short of six years of imprisonment) imposed on the defendant and the person subject to the request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant"), the defendant is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor is too uneasible and unfair.

Judgment

Defendant case (with regard to the assertion of unfair punishment, the Defendant was voluntarily surrenders to the investigative agency to make a confession of the instant crime and reflects his mistake, the possibility of improvement and the future need to be considered as a young juvenile aged 17, the Defendant brought about the instant crime with a serious dispute over the victim, and the Defendant did not receive proper education, decoration, and protection while growing up under the mother or her mother after the parent was divorced.

However, in full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the pleadings in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, family relation, character and conduct, motive and circumstance of the crime, criminal records, motive and method of the crime, and circumstance after the crime, etc., the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable, and thus, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit. The Defendant and the prosecutor’s aforementioned assertion are without merit, on the grounds that the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable.

The court below dismissed the defendant's request for an attachment order of an electronic tracking device, and the prosecutor filed an appeal against the defendant's case, the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders.