1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court, which maintained the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the Defendant was guilty of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the lower court did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as alleged in the grounds of appeal, by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on “injury” in the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment

In addition, examining various circumstances that are the conditions for sentencing, such as the age, sexual conduct, intelligence and environment of the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “the defendant”), who is recognized by records and evidence, and the victim’s relationship with the victim, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., even if considering the circumstances alleged by the defendant as grounds for appeal, the sentencing of the court below that maintained the first instance judgment that sentenced the defendant to 12 years of imprisonment is too unreasonable.

2. As to the case of the request for attachment order, in a case where the defendant files a final appeal against the defendant's case, the appeal shall be deemed to have been filed.

However, there is no statement of reason in the petition of appeal and there is no statement of reason for appeal in the statement of reason for appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.