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

A. Summary of the grounds for appeal 1) Defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”).

(2) In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court (five years of imprisonment, 80 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable. (2) The sentence imposed by the lower court in light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case by the prosecutor is too uneasible and unreasonable.

B. The judgment of the defendant has a record of criminal punishment over 16 times, and in full view of the factors favorable to the defendant, including the sentencing of the defendant, the age, character and conduct of the defendant, family relations, etc., as well as the various sentencing conditions shown in the argument of this case, considering the following: (a) after the execution of the sentence was completed on July 12, 2006, the sexual assault crime under paragraphs 1 and 2 of the judgment of the court below, which is very similar to the target of the crime and the applicable method, repeats the sexual assault crime; (b) the sexual assault victim is punished severely and the damage to the victim is not recovered; (c) the sexual assault victim itself is committed in an attempted crime; and (d) the defendant seems to have committed the sexual assault crime of this case somewhat contingently, it appears that the sentencing factors that are favorable to the defendant; and (d) the defendant's age, character and conduct, and family relations, it is deemed that the sentence of the court below is deemed adequate or too heavy.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

2. Part of the attachment order case

A. The summary of the grounds for appeal (public prosecutor) ordered by the lower court (five years) to attach an attachment order (five years) is too short and unfair.

B. In full view of all the circumstances described in the above 1-b above, the period of attachment of the location tracking electronic device ordered by the court below is deemed to be appropriate and is deemed to be too short and unfair. Thus, the prosecutor's grounds for appeal are without merit.

3. In conclusion, the appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor is with merit.