1. The part of the judgment below on the defendant is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years;

3. The defendant.

1. The court below rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request regarding the part of the case against which the defendant was found guilty and the part of the case for which the request for attachment order was filed, and there is no benefit of appeal regarding the part for which the request for attachment order was filed.

Therefore, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, the part of the judgment below regarding the request for attachment order among the judgment below is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court. Thus, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part of the case of

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the point of injury to rape No. 9 of the decision of the court below, the defendant had sexual intercourse under agreement with the victim, and assault was committed regardless of sexual intercourse, and with regard to the fact of forced indecent conduct by force on residential intrusion No. 10 of the decision of the court below, the defendant does not have committed an indecent act by using force (the defendant withdrawn his assertion that there was no misunderstanding that the defendant did not spread a fixed amount of money to the victim with regard to the point of assault by Rabb in No. 8 of the decision of the court below at the fifth trial of the court below at the trial of the fifth trial of the court below). (b) The punishment of the court below which was unfair in sentencing (no. 6 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. An ex officio determination 1) The facts charged as to the distribution of photographs with the consent to use of each camera, etc. (Article 3-b through (d) of the judgment of the court below) was sent to H mobile phones, the birth of the victim following the death of the victim, who was out of the custody of the victim after obtaining the consent of the victim at around 03:00 on June 28, 2014.

As a result, the Defendant distributed photographs of the victim's body body parts against the victim's will that could cause sexual humiliation or shame.

B) The Defendant.