A. The Defendant with mental and physical weakness committed each of the crimes in this case under a state of mental and physical weakness with a large quantity of mental and physical weakness.

B. Sentencing

2. Determination

A. In full view of the details and method of the crime committed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the content of the crime, and the conduct before and after the crime, it is not deemed that the Defendant had reached the crime of this case under the circumstances where the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions.

Defendant

The argument is without merit.

B. On October 14, 1998, on December 1, 200, the court below decided that the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for six months and six years and six months, and on January 27, 200, on December 1, 200, for violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims Thereof (Rape, etc.) at the Busan High Court on January 27, 2005, with the exception that the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for ten years due to the punishment of sexual crime, larceny, or intrusion upon residence, and two times more and more, in addition to the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and means of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the court sentenced the punishment (two years) by taking into account the following facts and the various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument.

The defendant asserts that the defendant has been treated with mental treatment, and that he intrudes upon the victim's residence for the purpose of larceny rather than sex offenses, etc., for reasons of sentencing unfair.

However, as seen earlier, the Defendant had been punished several times for crimes such as theft and rape, and the Defendant was in danger of recidivism and recidivism in Busan District Court on April 14, 2014.

The Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case under the status of attaching an electronic device even though it was recognized to have been subject to a decision to attach an electronic tracking device for ten years, and the crime of this case is the victim (the victim).