The judgment below

Of note, the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s appeal against the Defendant’s case and the case regarding attachment order are examined.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

In addition, a person subject to a request for attachment order (hereinafter only referred to as the defendant) and a person subject to a request for an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "person subject to a request for an attachment order") did not have committed an indecent act by force against the victim, and the house residing by the defendant was old, and in light of the structure of the defendant, the defendant committed an indecent act against the victim at his inside and outside, and if the victim committed a noise, the victim could sufficiently hear it. Therefore, the court below did not

The sentence of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Defendant

In addition, the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter only referred to as the defendant) B, the sentence of the court below (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

The sentence of the lower court against the Defendants of the Defendant’s case by the Prosecutor is too unfortunate and unreasonable.

In light of the fact that: (a) Defendant A had the record of committing a sex offense against a juvenile even before the instant crime was committed; (b) Defendant B forcibly committed an indecent act by force against his/her father for a long time; and (c) the assessment result of the risk of recidivism conducted by the assessment of the “Korea risk assessment scheme for sex offenders” and the “stimulation scheme for persons with a mental disorder” against the Defendants was “serious”, it is unreasonable to dismiss the Defendants’ request for an attachment order.

Defendant

The summary of this part of the facts charged against A (hereinafter referred to as the defendant only in this paragraph)'s assertion of misunderstanding of facts is as follows: (a) around 13:00 on a day from June to July of 2008, the defendant was from the large bank of the residence of the defendant A located in Sinpo City E around 13:0 to the victim (the age of eight at that time) who reported television together with the deceased villages; (b) after having known the victim at that place, in his/her hand, he/she was able to look at the victim's chest and sound, and she was collected in the victim's entrance; and (c) the victim refused to do so.