It is unfair that the court below exempted the defendant who has committed an unfair sexual crime from disclosure and notification order from disclosure and notification order.

The period of attachment of the location tracking device ordered by the court below to the defendant is too short and unfair.

Judgment

Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case regarding the argument of sentencing, the crime of this case is an indecent act by the Defendant’s chest with two grandchildren during dialogue with his wife 16 who is 16 years of age. In light of the circumstance and method of the crime, the age of the victim, and the relationship with the victim, etc., the crime of this case requires heavy liability in terms of the following: (a) the Defendant neglected the responsibility to protect and rear the victim; (b) the Defendant took the subject of resolving sexual desire; (c) the victim seems to have caused considerable mental pain and sense of sexual shame; (d) the victim seems to have suffered a sense of sense of sexual identity and sense of sense; and (e) the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for three years and suspension of execution for five years at the Daegu High Court on January 13, 2011; and (e) the Defendant seems to have suffered a negative impact on the establishment of sexual identity and sense of sense in the future growth process.

On the other hand, the defendant appears to reflect in depth the wrongness while committing the crime, and the victim submitted a written agreement at the investigation stage, but reversed his/her consent through a lawyer on December 29, 2016. However, on January 11, 2017, he/she submitted a written application for a challenge to the lower court on February 2, 2017, and expressed his/her intention that he/she does not want punishment in the public prosecutor’s currency, and again, on March 9, 2017.