In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

A. In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment, four years of disclosure of information, and four years of notification) in light of the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”), is unreasonable, and the period of attachment of the location tracking device (ten years) is too prolonged and unreasonable.

B. In light of the various sentencing conditions of the Prosecutor’s instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated offense, which is disadvantageous to the Defendant to the judgment of the instant case, and the instant crime was committed by intrusion upon the residence of female women at the night, rape, and committing an injury by using a deadly weapon in the process of committing the instant crime. It appears that the mental and physical pain that the victim had experienced due to the instant crime appears to be high.

The sentencing factors favorable to the defendant include: (a) the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case and reflects his mistake; (b) the equality in the case that the judgment is to be rendered simultaneously with the crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims, etc. (Rape Injury) which became final and conclusive; and (c) the defendant has been selected as an excellent character education while living a prison life for at least seven years; and (d) the correction and improvement has been made to a certain extent, such as passing an examination

In full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing and other factors of sentencing indicated in the argument of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and family relationship, it is not recognized that the sentence of the lower court against the Defendant is deemed reasonable, and is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

B. The Defendant’s records of sexual crimes and the background and method of each of the crimes of this case, as to the part of the attachment order case.