Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the part of the Defendant case, the Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) tried to rape the victim, but they were attempted, and the Defendant committed the instant crime in a state of mental disability with mental disability as a person with a disability of class 2 with intellectual disability, and the Defendant appears to have committed a crime in a state of mental disability; and the Defendant appears to have an attitude against himself/herself while making a confession from

On the other hand, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant who intrudes on the residence of the victim with intellectual disability and caused bodily injury while rapeing the victim while carrying a dangerous object. The crime of this case is disadvantageous to the nature of the crime. The victim was committed by the defendant's assault, such as the defendant's physical body, such as shoulder, shoulder, flag, distribution, ambuck, bucks, buckbucks, arms, etc., and the head is flaged, and the defendant was under suspension of execution due to the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a minor under thirteen years of age) in 2012, and the victim again committed the crime of this case. The victim was punished by the defendant at an investigative agency, and the victim was still unable to agree with the victim and was not compensated for damage.

In addition to these circumstances, the sentence of the lower court is within the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines (special mitigation area, 3 to 9 years of imprisonment), the fact that there is no special change in circumstances that may differ from the punishment after the sentence of the lower judgment is rendered, and the sentencing factors of the Defendant, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, do not seem to be unfair because the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

The defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

(b).