Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not properly harm the victim’s sexual intercourse at the time of the instant case but did not assault the victim in order to prevent the Defendant’s sexual intercourse from being exposed to the wind.

B. At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was in a physical and mental weak state by drinking alcohol.

(c)

The punishment of the court below (six years of imprisonment) which is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

(d)

It is unlawful that the court below ordered the defendant to attach an electronic tracking device, although the defendant does not pose a risk of preventing sexual assault from committing a sexual crime and again committing a sexual crime.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts, namely, ① the victim requested the police to promptly demand the defendant at the time of the instant case, but the victim did not refuse to make a sexual appearance, and thus, the defendant took a bath.

The statement was made (37-38 pages of the evidence record) and the defendant Indian investigative agency's refusal to do so at the time of the crime, and it is sufficient that the victim did not want to do so, and that the victim did not have his sexual organ as soon as possible, and that the victim did not assault the victim.

In light of the fact that the police confirmed the Defendant’s sexual state during the process of investigating the Defendant (Evidence Nos. 63, 67, 138) and the following day of the instant crime, the Defendant used assaulting the victim on the ground that the Defendant requested the victim to sexual intercourse as stated in the facts charged, but did not properly respond to it (Evidence Nos. 64, 138).