In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

A. 1) The sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable on the grounds that the period of disclosure and notification of personal information disclosure and notification orders issued by the lower court is too unreasonable. 2) The period of disclosure and notification of personal information disclosure and notification orders by the lower court is too excessive.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s sentencing is too unjustifiable and unreasonable. 2) It is unreasonable for the lower court to dismiss the Defendant’s request for an attachment order even if the lower court’s dismissal of the request for an attachment order is recognized as an unfair criminal

2. Determination of the accused case

A. It is reasonable to respect the Defendant and prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing where there is no change in sentencing conditions compared to the lower court’s judgment, and the lower court’s sentencing is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Circumstances asserted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor as an element of sentencing are already revealed in the proceedings of the lower court’s pleadings, or the lower court appears to have sufficiently taken into account in determining the Defendant’s punishment. There is no particular change in circumstances in the sentencing guidelines and the matters subject to the conditions of sentencing after the lower judgment was sentenced.

In light of the circumstances that the lower court rendered on the grounds of sentencing, taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and consequence of the crime, relationship with the victim, and circumstances that are revealed in the argument of the instant case, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is too heavy or unreasonable, even considering the circumstances that the Defendant and the Prosecutor are in progress within the reasonable scope of discretion.

The defendant and prosecutor's assertion of unreasonable sentencing are without merit.

B. The Defendant’s improper assertion of disclosure and notification order was based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, and the Defendant’s age, electricity, risk of recidivism, and the background and method of the instant crime, and disclosure thereof.