1. The part of the judgment below regarding the defendant's case and the part regarding the claim for observation order shall be reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment.

1. As to the part of the case of the Defendant, the lower court rendered a judgment ordering the observation of protection for three years with respect to the part of the case of the case of the case of the Defendant, and regarding the part of the case of the case of the attachment order claim, the lower court rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request. Accordingly, there is no benefit of appeal with respect to the part of the case of the case of the attachment order claim.

Therefore, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on the Installation, etc. of Electronic Devices (hereinafter “Act on the Protection and Observation, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders”), the scope of this court’s adjudication is limited to the part of the case except for the part on which the request for attachment order is filed and the part on which the order to observe is requested for protection, where the title was changed by Act No. 16923 on February 4, 2020 and the content of each provision has not been changed.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles 1) As to the criminal facts No. 2 as stated in the judgment below, the defendant committed a sexual act with the above victim under the consent of the victim D (tentative name, 16 years of age) who is a child or juvenile, and did not have any act of similarity or sexual intercourse with the above victim by force.

Based on the statement of the above victim suspected of credibility, the defendant exercised the power of the above victim.

The judgment of the court below is erroneous in finding facts.

2) As to the facts constituting the crime No. 3 in the judgment below, the Defendant did not commit any assault in the course of sexual intercourse with the victim D, and the said victim did not resist any resistance.

In order to confirm whether the defendant deleted the video sent to the above victim after the completion of sex relationship, it is only causing bodily injury to the above victim while taking the cell phone in the process of receiving the cell phone of the above victim, and it is also a crime of injury separate from sex relationship.