In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

A. There was no intention to rape the victim of mistake of fact.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s sentencing (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the part of the defendant's case

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) had the intent to rape the victim.

B. Although the Defendant appears to be somewhat against the assertion on unfair sentencing, as seen in the above, it is doubtful that the truth of the Defendant’s assertion on unfair sentencing is true, as he did not make any effort to recover damage, again, during the period of repeated crime, and the same crime is committed again again during the period of repeated crime, and other various sentencing conditions indicated in the record, such as age, character and behavior, character and character, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstance after the crime, etc., are considered to be too unreasonable.

3. As long as the Defendant filed an appeal against the Defendant regarding the part of the case for which the attachment order was requested, it shall be deemed that the Defendant filed an appeal against the case for the attachment order pursuant to Article 9(8) of the Act on the Probation and the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders. However, the Defendant’s petition of appeal or the grounds of appeal are not indicated in the grounds of appeal, and even if examining the judgment below, the part of the case

4. The Defendant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 35 of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders on the ground that the appeal is groundless.