Since only the defendant appealed against this, the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the case of attachment order does not have a benefit of appeal.

Therefore, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Electronic Device Attachment Act, the part of the judgment below regarding the request for attachment order among the judgment below is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part of the judgment below concerning the defendant's case

2. Determination on the part of the case of the defendant

A. The summary of the grounds of appeal 1) In light of the defendant's age, sexual conduct, environment, risk of recidivism, etc., the court below's order to disclose and notify the defendant's personal information for a period of five years, despite special circumstances that should not disclose and notify the defendant's personal information, is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to such order, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (seven years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, in principle, requires disclosure and notification of personal information of all persons who committed sexual crimes to protect our society from sexual crimes, there are special circumstances where such disclosure shall not be an exception.

If it is judged, it shall be removed.

Here, "personal information shall not be disclosed" as an exception to disclosure orders and notification orders.