Therefore, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 9 (8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the attachment order is excluded, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part of the case of the defendant.

2. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable on the gist of the grounds of appeal.

3. It is recognized that the defendant's mistake is divided, and that the defendant does not want the punishment of the defendant by agreement with the victim.

However, the defendant again committed the crime of this case during the period of probation even though he had the same criminal record, and the crime of this case was committed by force by the defendant following a female victim who was married at night, and the nature of the crime is not good. The crime of this case showed considerable mental suffering and pain to the victim due to the crime of this case, and considering the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and other conditions of sentencing specified in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the punishment of the court below is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

4. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.