In addition, both the appeal by the person requested to attach an attachment order and the appeal by the prosecutor are dismissed.

A. The Defendant and the respondent for attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) are related to the facts constituting a crime in a mistake of facts or a misunderstanding of legal principles, and as to the part of paragraph (1) (Habitual larceny), the Defendant and the respondent for attachment order.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s dismissal of the Defendant’s request for the attachment order of this case is unreasonable, even if it is found that the Defendant’s dismissal of the request for the attachment order of this case is unjust.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court also asserted that this part of the grounds for appeal were the same, and the lower court was aware that the Defendant had lacking the ability or decision-making ability to discern things due to the decline in the real judgment by alcohol dependence, the increase in sexual desire, and the decline in impulse ability at the time of the instant crime, and that the following circumstances recognized by each evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, namely, ① the Defendant was sentenced to a suspension of execution four years on October 12, 2006, on the ground that he had been sentenced to a fine of KRW 10,000 to a female’s residence, and was sentenced to a fine of KRW 10,70,70,000, and was sentenced to a fine of KRW 20,50,000,000,000 from May 28, 2006 to August 4, 2006.