Defendant

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable for the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order.

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

2) Although the court below dismissed the request for the attachment order of this case, although the defendant and the requester for the attachment order of this case (hereinafter the defendant) committed a sexual crime against a person under the age of 19 and the risk of recidivism, it is improper for the court below to dismiss the request.

2. Determination

A. The instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor requires strict punishment against the Defendant, in consideration of the following: (a) the Defendant committed an indecent act or forced indecent act by taking advantage of the victim under the age of 13, who is his married E, on several occasions; and (b) the nature of the crime is heavy; and (c) there is a high possibility of social and moral criticism.

However, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original court, and the sentencing of the original court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, because the defendant is divided into his own mistake, that the defendant does not have the same criminal record, and that there is no change in the conditions

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive, means, and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed appropriate, and it cannot be deemed unfair because it is too heavy or unfasible. Thus, the above argument by the Defendant and the Prosecutor is without merit.

B. The lower court’s determination on the prosecutor’s unjust assertion on the prosecutor’s attachment order 1) is based on the following circumstances, i.e., (i) the Defendant did not have any history of punishment for a sexual crime; (ii) the Defendant’s application of the risk assessment method of recidivism by a sexual offender in Korea to the Defendant constitutes an “Intermediate” level; and (iii) the application method of the risk of recidivism by a sexual offender in Korea constitutes seven points.