The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

except that this judgment.

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court by the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The Defendant’s sentence imposed by the lower court in the Defendant’s case is too unfilled and unreasonable. 2) Even if the Defendant’s risk of recidivism in the attachment order case, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby dismissing the Defendant’s request for the

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unreasonable sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant, on the following grounds: (a) the victims invaded into the telecom and rape or indecent act by compulsion; and (b) several cases of intrusion into the telecom room without permission of the telecom manager; and (c) the nature of the crime

The fact that the defendant recognized all of his mistakes in the trial and reflects in depth, the victim L, victim G, and victim J, and the victim submitted a written application to the purport that "the defendant must compensate for and agree on the damage caused by the instant case to his family" in the trial, and that "the victims are forced to keep the defendant in a close fashion so that he can return the defendant to home and live heavily for the family and society at home" in the trial. The defendant is only three times of a fine, and there is no criminal conviction or more than a suspended sentence, and that the defendant suffers from congenital-scars' disease, and the defendant suffers from a congenital-scars' disease and suffers from a simple and ad hoc surgery, which is favorable to the defendant.

In this regard, comprehensively considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, motive and background leading to the instant crime, and various sentencing conditions as shown in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances before and after the instant crime, the lower court’s punishment is deemed to be too unreasonable.

Therefore, the above argument of the defendant is reasonable, and this part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

B. The lower court determined as to the attachment order case: (1) the Defendant did not have any past record of sexual crime; and (2) the Defendant.