The remainder of the judgment of the first instance, excluding the attachment order, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

1. The first instance court found the Defendant guilty of rapeing a victim who is a juvenile and dismissed the Defendant’s imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of four years and a short of three years. On the part of the prosecutor’s request for an attachment order, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant is likely to recommit a sex crime.

On this ground, only the defendant appealed from the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground of unfair sentencing, and the part requesting an attachment order among the judgment of the court of first instance does not have interest

(See Supreme Court Decision 82Do2476 delivered on December 14, 1982). Therefore, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, the part requesting an attachment order is excluded within the scope of the trial of this court. Thus, the scope of the trial of this court is limited to the remaining part except the part requesting an attachment order among the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. The punishment sentenced by the first instance court to the summary of the grounds for appeal (limited to four years of imprisonment for a maximum term, three years of short term, etc.) is too unreasonable;

3. Before determining the grounds for appeal of the judgment, ex officio, the defendant was sentenced to an irregular term of punishment as he fell under the juvenile under Article 2 of the Juvenile Act at the time the judgment of the court of first instance was sentenced to K students, but it is clear that the defendant was 19 years of age or older at the time of the judgment of the court of first instance, and as such, the judgment of the court of first instance cannot be maintained any longer due to the above reasons.

4. As such, the above reasons for ex officio reversal are as follows, without examining the argument of unfair sentencing, and the following is to be decided again after the pleading pursuant to Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts charged in the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1..