Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the person who requested probation order are dismissed.

1. The lower court rendered a conviction on the part of the Defendant case, and accepted the prosecutor’s request regarding the probation order case, and dismissed the prosecutor’s request regarding the part of the attachment order case, and only the Defendant and the person who requested probation order (hereinafter “Defendant”) appealed on the part of the lower judgment regarding the Defendant case and the probation order case.

Therefore, there is no benefit in appeal regarding the part of the attachment order case against the defendant.

As such, Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, a legal fiction of appeal, shall not apply (see Supreme Court Decision 82Do2476, Dec. 14, 1982; Supreme Court Decision 201Do6705, Aug. 25, 201; Supreme Court Decision 201Do6705, 201Do20, Aug. 25, 201); and the part of the attachment order case shall not be subject to second trial.

Ultimately, the part of the attachment order case is excluded from the scope of the trial of this Court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal - Part of defendant's case

A. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to issue an order to disclose or notify personal information to the defendant, even though there are special circumstances under which the disclosure or notification order should not be disclosed or notified to the defendant.

3. Determination

A. As to the assertion of unreasonable sentencing (1) part of the Defendant’s case, the Defendant appears to have committed the instant crime under the circumstance that the Defendant would have committed the instant crime under the status of falling short of his capacity due to intelligence at the boundary line level, etc., and the Defendant is the primary offender, and the Defendant led to the confession of the instant crime, and the mistake is divided, etc. in favor of the Defendant.

However, the crime of this case was committed by force by force on the part of the defendant's house, leading the victim's hand at the age of 12, who was walking along the path, at an elementary school and at the age of 6.