The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

information about the defendant for five years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) against the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence of the lower court against the Defendant in the part of the Defendant case is too unfasible and unreasonable. 2) The Defendant, in the part of the case of the case of the attachment order, is highly likely to repeat a crime due to the lack of judgment and shock control capacity as a mental retardation, and thus, it is unreasonable for the lower court to dismiss the Defendant’s request for

2. We also examine the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion of unreasonable sentencing regarding the part of the Defendant’s case.

The crime of this case is likely to be more severe punishment in light of the following: (a) the Defendant prepared in advance for Make and excessive period, and walked about five times during this period, or threatening women who work as a married, taking the property, taking the right away, and taking the property into account the attempted crime; and (b) some victims are not only those who forced indecent acts by compulsion; and (c) the frequency of the crime is no less than that of the crime; and (d) the risk of the water law is more severe punishment.

However, the Defendant is an initial offender who has no criminal history of punishment, and was arrested as an offender of the special robbery of this case and then investigated the sexual assault crime of this case by arbitrarily stating and undergoing investigation, etc., the Defendant committed the crime of this case. In light of the intelligence index 57, the Defendant seems to have committed the crime of this case by getting out of the parent’s protection in the state of mental and physical disability. In addition, the Defendant agreed with E among the victims of sexual assault crime of this case, the victim of the victim of the sexual assault of this case was made in the first instance court, and the victim of this case did not want the punishment of the Defendant, and the amount of the strong protection of the Defendant’s parents is relatively small, and the Defendant’s parents have strong intent to protect the Defendant.