The judgment below

Among the defendant, the part of the case and the part of the attachment order shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

The court below found Defendant and Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case against Defendant and the requester for an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”), and ordered Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for a period of five years, and to impose an electronic monitoring device, and to dismiss the prosecutor’s request for an attachment order.

Since only the defendant filed an appeal against this issue, the case of the protection observation order shall be excluded from the scope of the adjudication of this court, notwithstanding the provisions of Articles 21-8 and 9 (8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and the Electronic Monitoring, Etc., as there is no interest in the appeal against the case of the protection observation order.

Therefore, the subject of this court's trial is limited to the defendant case and the case of attachment order.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal included the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts in the initial reasons for appeal (the assertion that it did not reach a simple period of appeal), but the above assertion of misunderstanding of facts was withdrawn as the indictment was modified as follows.

Sentencing : The punishment of the lower court (four years of imprisonment) is too heavy.

3. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant for an ex officio judgment.

In the first instance of the prosecution, the part regarding “componion” in the name of the crime against the defendant is “Attempted rape,” and the applicable legal provision is to change the relation between the crime committed with the attempted rape and confinement under Articles 300, 297, 276(1), and 40 of the Criminal Act from the perspective of substantive competition.

“In the indictment, the victim has been raped by inserting the sexual organ after suppressing the reflect of the charge.”

Accordingly, the defendant detained the victim on the above vehicle, and raped the victim.

“After suppressing the resistance,” the part “ was attempted to rape the victim, but did not result in such rape.”

In this respect, the defendant is the victim of the above vehicle.