The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a maximum term of three years and a short term of two years and six months.

80 hours per the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the person subject to an application for an attachment order (hereinafter “defendant”) are deemed to be unreasonable because the court below’s punishment (long-term three years of imprisonment, and short-term two years and six months) is too unreasonable. The summary of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair.

2. We examine the part on the claim for attachment order before determining ex officio and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing regarding the part on the claim for attachment order.

The risk of recidivism of a sexual crime under Article 5 (1) of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") means the possibility of recidivism is insufficient only by the possibility of recidivism, and it is highly probable that the person who requested the attachment order will injure legal peace by committing a sexual crime again in the future.

The existence of the risk of recidivism of a sexual crime shall be objectively determined by comprehensively assessing various circumstances, such as the occupation and environment of the person against whom the attachment order is requested, the criminal conduct before and after the crime, the motive and means of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and the situation after the crime, and the outline of the crime. Such a determination shall be based on the time of the judgment,

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7410, 2010Do444 Decided December 9, 2010, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant committed a crime of sexual intercourse with a disabled person on two occasions on December 2, 2012 when the Defendant was in the second grade of a middle school, and thereby, committed the instant crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Persons with Disabilities) in the Seo-gu District Court Branch Branch of the Daegu District Court on September 12, 2013, even though the Defendant was sentenced to a three-year suspended sentence for three years due to a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Persons with Disabilities) at the same four-year suspended sentence during the period of the suspended sentence.

However, it includes a prior investigation report against the defendant.