The judgment below

The part of the case of the defendant is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Part 1 of the case against the defendant and the claimant for the attachment order (hereinafter "the defendant") asserted the misunderstanding of the facts or the misapprehension of the legal principle, and the victim of the intimidation expressed his intention to punish prior to the pronouncement of the judgment below, and thus, the judgment dismissing the prosecution should be rendered.

However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the victim’s non-existence of punishment, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the judgment.

2) The Defendant asserts that the lower court’s punishment (three years of imprisonment, and 80 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable, and the Prosecutor asserts that the lower court’s punishment is too unfasible and unfair.

B. The lower court’s dismissal of the prosecutor’s request for attachment order of an electronic tracking device is unlawful, since the Defendant’s request for attachment order is likely to recommit a sexual crime.

2. The part of the defendant case

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, 1) the victim’s attachment of the charge of intimidation among the facts charged in the instant case, which was based on the records and the process of litigation, on July 29, 2016, “The victim agreed upon with the Defendant, and thus, the remaining presiding judge sets the Defendant’s highest preference period to the Defendant.

“A written agreement is drawn up and delivered to the Defendant’s side, and the Defendant’s defense counsel received KRW 10 million from the Defendant’s side, and the Defendant’s defense counsel submitted the written agreement to the lower court on June 8, 2016.

On August 17, 2016, the court of original judgment ordered the Suwon District Court's punishment history and court investigator to investigate the sentencing regarding "unlimited amount of punishment" and "serious reflective amount" etc.

Accordingly, on August 26, 2016, the Suwon District Court investigator S of the court belonging to the Suwon District Court should be punished for the value of the crime by the victim's statement.

“The victim......”