Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

In addition, the punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, 40 hours of completing sexual assault treatment programs, 3 years of employment restriction orders) is too unreasonable.

The prosecutor's sentence of the court below is so unfased that it is unfair, and the defendant needs to obtain an order to disclose, notify and attach personal information, but the court below's failure to do so is illegal.

The instant crime on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor regarding the Defendant’s judgment of the Defendant and the prosecutor regarding the instant case is not very good for the Defendant to have committed an indecent act after inducing the victim who is the second-class disabled person with intellectual disability to his/her own residence, and the victim appears to have suffered considerable mental impulse and pain due to the instant crime, and the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of repeated offense is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, it is favorable to the defendant that the defendant led to the confession and reflect of the crime of this case, that the defendant does not want the punishment against the defendant by mutual consent with the victim, and that the defendant should consider the equality with the crime of violating the Child Welfare Act in the final judgment.

As above, in full view of the sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., including the circumstances favorable to the Defendant, it cannot be deemed that the lower court is too heavy or unreasonable to the extent that it is deemed that the sentence imposed by the Defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing cannot be accepted.

There is no history of punishment for a sex offense against the defendant on the prosecutor's assertion of disclosure and notification of personal information, and the sentence of this case, the completion of sexual assault treatment programs, and the restriction on employment.