Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “defendants”) are too unreasonable. The lower court’s punishment (one year of imprisonment and six years of location tracking device attachment order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court rendered a judgment of conviction on the part of the Defendant case, and accepted the prosecutor’s request regarding the part regarding which the request for attachment order was filed, and dismissed the prosecutor’s request regarding the part regarding the probation order claim

Notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Electronic Devices (Act No. 16923, Feb. 4, 2020; hereinafter the same was amended from the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders), the part of the request for probation order which is dismissed by the court below is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court, since there is no benefit to appeal against the defendant.

B. It seems that the defendant's judgment of the accused case recognized the crime of this case and repented his mistake.

Some of the victims of the instant special robbery were recovered and returned to the victim, and the crime of fraud against the victim's OO was committed in an attempted attempt, and the amount of damage for each of the instant crimes is relatively little.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant entering a convenience store, and knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knif