The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request regarding the part of the Defendant’s case regarding which the request for attachment order was sought, and the only Defendant appealed therefrom. As such, there is no benefit of appeal regarding the part regarding which the request for attachment order was filed.

Therefore, Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, a legal fiction of appeal, does not apply (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 82Do2476, Dec. 14, 1982). Therefore, the claim for attachment order against the Defendant is excluded from the scope of the trial of this court, and as a result, the scope of the trial of this court is limited to the defendant's case which was pronounced guilty in the

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime, and was in a state of mental disorder or mental disability.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (work for a period of three years and six months of imprisonment, and a period of 80 hours of sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. According to the Defendant’s statement in this court and the statement in the 2nd Investigation Report on Claim Before the Defendant’s argument about mental and physical disorder, the Defendant was engaged in usual rental farming, and the Defendant took part in the small amount of illness almost every day over three to four times each day. As a result, “AUD screening test (AUD) for alcohol use disorder” developed by the World Health Organization, the Defendant took 14 points in total, and took part in the advice and progress about alcohol, and there was a low degree of dependence on alcohol, but there was a circumstance to see that the Defendant was in a drinking state at the time of each of the instant crimes, even if it was evaluated as dangerous drinking in drinking consumption items, and even if so, there were various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s average volume of alcohol, the background leading to each of the instant crimes, the method and method of each of the instant crimes, and the Defendant’s behavior before and after each of the instant crimes.