Therefore, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 9 (8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. for Specific Criminal Offenders, the part of the judgment of the court below concerning attachment order is excluded, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part concerning

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant was sexual intercourse under the agreement with the victim and did not have sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the victim's state of failing to resist, and the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case on the grounds of the victim's statement, etc.

[Defendant’s defense counsel asserted to the effect that the judgment of the court below was unlawful in terms of unfair sentencing on the first trial date after the deadline for submitting the statement of grounds for appeal, but such circumstance alone cannot be deemed as grounds for appeal as alleged (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do8488, May 31, 2007; 2006Do88, May 31, 2007; Defendant committed the instant crime again despite the same criminal records; Defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the victim’s state of non-performance of duty to resist; Defendant’s letter or agreement was not received from the victim until the trial; Defendant’s age, character and conduct and environment; Defendant’s motive, means and consequence of the instant crime; and the scope of recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Committee, etc., the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.