In addition, all appeals filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

A. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable for the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order.

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2) It is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the request for the attachment order of this case, although it is found that a sexual crime was committed by the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") twice or more times, and the recidivism risk is likely to be committed.

2. Determination

A. Considering the fact that the Defendant again committed the instant crime while having the same criminal record and that the Defendant did not agree with the victim until the trial was held, strict punishment against the Defendant is required.

However, considering the circumstances of sentencing as stated in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the court below is deemed appropriate, and is too heavy or too unreasonable, and thus, the above argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit. The above argument by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit.

B. 1) The lower court’s determination on the prosecutor’s wrongful assertion on the prosecutor’s attachment order 1) assessed the Defendant’s recidivism risk at the level of “high (15 points)” on the following grounds, i.e., assessment of the Defendant’s risk of recidivism by sexual offenders in Korea (KSAS) as dangerous factors, by recognizing the Defendant’s risk factors as “the use of significant violence (1 point)” and “the avoidance of responsibility for the instant crime (1 point).” However, in light of the content, etc. of the instant crime, the Defendant used the Defendant’s “ conspicuous violence”.