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 judgment of the defendant is divided into his mistake, and that the defendant has no criminal record.

However, the crime of this case is committed by murdering the victim's neck after the victim was rejected due to his death with the victim. The nature of the crime is not very good; the defendant did not agree with the victim's bereaved family members up to the trial; the victim's bereaved family members want to be punished by the severe punishment; the defendant's age, sex and environment; the 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 behavior and environment; the motive, means and consequence of the crime; etc. after the crime, it is not recognized that the court below's punishment is too unreasonable. Thus, the above argument 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.