The judgment below

The part, excluding the dismissal of public prosecution, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

except that this shall not apply.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) were in a state of mental and physical disability due to the certificate of her child defense at the time of each of the instant crimes.

B. The sentencing and attachment period of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the mental appraisal statement against the defendant of the Medical Treatment and Custody Director by the entrustment of the court below's mental appraisal on the part of the defendant's case, the defendant is judged to have had sexual impulses, sexual impulses, sexual conduct repeated against the remaining members prior to the scambling, and sexual intercourses (sexual scamscamscamscams), and in full view of the motive, circumstance, means and attitudes of each of the crimes of this case recognized by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, and the defendant's behavior before and after each of the crimes of this case, it is presumed that the mental condition at the time of each of the crimes of this case was the above.

Therefore, it is reasonable to view that at the time of each of the crimes in this case, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical disability, where the ability to discern things or make a decision was lowered due to sexual intercourses (provokings, sexual intercourses).

Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental disability is justified.

B. In light of the relevant provisions of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders as to the attachment order case, where the judgment of the court below on the prosecuted case is unlawful and the part concerning the prosecuted case among the judgment below is reversed, the part concerning the request for attachment order to be tried together with the examination and the judgment shall not be reversed.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do5291, 2012 Jeondo112, Jun. 28, 2012). 3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is reasonable and there is a ground for ex officio destruction as seen earlier with respect to the part regarding the claim for attachment order.