The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

The request for the attachment order of this case is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is improper that the sentence of the lower court (five years of imprisonment and 120 hours of order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable for the Defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter only referred to as the Defendant).

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant case is too minor, and it is unreasonable for the lower court to exempt the Defendant from disclosure notification order. 2) The lower judgment dismissing the Defendant’s request for attachment order even if the Defendant’s request for attachment order is recognized as a risk of recidivism of sexual crimes.

2. Before making ex officio decisions on the grounds for appeal by the accused and the prosecutor following the amendment of the indictment, the prosecutor applied for changes in the indictment of this case, among the facts charged of this case, to the effect that each of the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Minors under the age of 13) is violated (Rape with Relatives). The part of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Minors under the age of 13) is changed in exchange for each other to the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act with relatives in relation to relatives), and the applicable provisions of this Act are changed to “Article 7(1) and (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes” in accordance with the changed facts charged, and the relevant provisions of this Act are changed to “Article 5(1) and (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, Articles 297 and 298 of the Criminal Act.

3. If so, the judgment of the court below is based on the above grounds for ex officio reversal, and without examining the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor, Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the specific criminal offenders.