All the judgment below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

For the defendant 40 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant and the person for whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) (three years of imprisonment with prison labor for a two-year grace period) is deemed unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s determination that dismissed the Defendant’s request for an attachment order against the Defendant even if the Defendant’s request for an attachment order was sufficiently recognized to pose a risk of re-afusing

2. Determination

A. As to the part of the Defendant case, the Defendant agreed with the victim of rape attempted, and the victim did not want the punishment of the Defendant is favorable to the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case was committed by the defendant using psychotropic drugs exempted from water containing psychotropic drugs, and the crime of this case was very heavy since the method of crime was extremely poor.

Furthermore, on April 4, 1994, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for rape, etc. at Seoul High Court. On March 24, 200, the Seoul High Court had been sentenced to six years of imprisonment for rape, etc., and on March 24, 200, the Defendant committed the instant sexual crime. In addition, the sentencing guidelines do not apply to attempted rape, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, the background and progress of the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime. Since the scope of recommendation for the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc. (the basic area) is eight to one year and six months (the basic area) of imprisonment, the lower limit of the sentencing range of recommendation for the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., on which the sentencing guidelines set is set shall be set, and if it has been adjusted according to the legal applicable applicable sentencing range, the sentencing range is

In full view of all B, the judgment of the court below which sentenced the suspension of the execution of imprisonment to the defendant is considered to be too uncomfortable and unfair.

Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is reasonable.

B. The lower court’s judgment on the part of the claim for attachment order is legitimate.