A. In light of the statements of the victim with high credibility of mistake of facts and CCTV images where the defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “the defendant”) met the victim, etc., even though the defendant could have intentionally committed an indecent act against the victim, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in this case, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. It is unreasonable that the lower court dismissed the Defendant’s request for an attachment order of an electronic tracking device, despite the risk of repeating a sexual crime.

2. Determination

A. On March 17, 2015, the Defendant received a request from the victim D (the 24 years old), who was holding a house from the 1st floor parking lot of Seocheon-gu Ctel in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seoul, to find a gate, to “I would be able to lend a Handphone to a large number of vehicles.” Accordingly, the Defendant, without lending a Hand phone, was unable to say that I would like to commit indecent act by force, and it is difficult for the Defendant to see or see that I would like to do so, “I would like to do so,” and “I would like to do so, I would like to do so,” and it is difficult for the Defendant to see or see the victim’s losses, “I would like to do so,” and the Defendant’s body and body was forced immediately after the victim’s booming, and the lower court determined that there was an indecent act by force between the Defendant and the Defendant or the Defendant’s body.