A. The judgment of the court below on the part of the defendant's case (the summary of the defendant's case is limited to the crime as stated in Paragraph 2 of the judgment below) is too unafford. The sentencing of the court below is too unafford.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the request for the attachment order of this case, although the defendant and the respondent for the attachment order of this case (hereinafter “defendant”) are found to have the habit of sexual crime and the recidivism risk exists.

2. Determination

A. Considering that the part of the defendant's case was already punished for the same kind of crime, attempted to commit an indecent act against the victim who was at the end of multiple times' residence intrusion, the process of the crime was closely and planned, the victim's age was over 19 years, etc., the defendant's mistake is very large.

However, since the defendant led to the crime, there is no record of punishment except for one-time fine due to the violation of the Road Traffic Act, etc. before the crime of this case was punished for sexual assault crime in 198, the crime of indecent act by compulsion was committed, together with the suspended execution of imprisonment, and the order to attend probation and sexual assault therapy was also sentenced for six months as well as the defendant's age, character and behavior and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime of this case were considered, it cannot be deemed that the court below's punishment is too unjustifiable, and the prosecutor's allegation in this part is without merit.

B. The prosecutor of the part of the attachment order case is not only found to have a habit of committing two-time sexual crimes, but also also planned in advance that the risk of recidivism was an intermediate level as a result of the application of the Korea sex offender risk assessment scheme (KSOAS).