Defendant

In addition, both appeals filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) were physically and mentally weak at the time of committing the instant crime, and the Defendant was physically and mentally weak due to mental illness, such as excessive behavioral disorder, as the third degree of intellectual disability at the time of the instant crime.

2) The lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

3) It is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to place an employment restriction for a period of five years against child and juvenile-related institutions, etc., which was unfair by the lower court

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2) The judgment of the court below which dismissed the Defendant’s request for the attachment order of this case, which rejected the Defendant’s request for the attachment order of this case, was erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the risk of recidivism.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the Defendant’s assertion on the Defendant’s mental and physical weakness, it is found that the Defendant was diagnosed by F Council members of F as “mental retardation or lack of caution,” etc. as a intellectual disability 3, but according to the Defendant’s report on the result of the mental appraisal by the Medical Care and Custody Center at the lower court, the Defendant’s diagnosis as “psychological disorder and lack of ability to discern things or make decisions.” In addition, according to the Defendant’s mental and physical condition at the time of committing the instant crime, it is indicated that “The Defendant is presumed to have been relatively sound at the time of committing the instant crime,” and all the circumstances revealed in the argument of the instant case, such as the background of the instant crime and the Defendant’s act before and after the instant crime, etc., the Defendant is deemed to have weak ability to discern things at the time of committing the instant crime due to the foregoing mental health problems, etc., and thus, was in a state of lacking ability to make decisions.

It is difficult to see it.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

2) The Defendant’s judgment as to the wrongful argument of sentencing between the Defendant and the Prosecutor in this case.