The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for seven years.

For a period of 10 years, the information on the defendant.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

In the part of the defendant's case and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendants"), the punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (eight years of imprisonment and ten years of disclosure notice) is too unreasonable.

The sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

It is improper for the court below to accept the defendant's request for an attachment order of an electronic tracking device even though the defendant does not pose a risk of repeating the crime.

The court below's order the defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for 10 years is too unfortunate and unfair.

Judgment

We also examine the defendant's and prosecutor's allegation of unfair sentencing.

In light of the fact that the Defendant continuously tried against the victim of her young age who does not live together with his/her father and female, and that the same crime as the crime is not good, and that the victim seems to have suffered a big mental impulse, it is inevitable to punish the Defendant with severe penalty corresponding to the crime.

However, in light of the fact that there is no record of crime against the defendant, the mother of a female victim, etc., voluntarily surrenders to the facts of each of the crimes of this case, and the victim did not want the punishment of the defendant by mutual consent with the victim during the trial, and other circumstances such as the defendant's age, character and behavior, family environment, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is without merit, and the defendant's argument of unfair sentencing is justified.

The risk of recidivism of sexual crimes under Article 5 (1) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders in the part of the case of the request for attachment order is not enough.