Defendant

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s punishment against the Defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (the Defendant’s case part; hereinafter “Defendant”) (the imprisonment of three years and six months, the disclosure information using the information and communications network five years, and the notification information five years) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s punishment (three years and six months of imprisonment, five years of information disclosure via information and communications networks, five years of information notification information) against the Defendant part of the Defendant’s case is too unhued and unreasonable. 2) The lower court’s dismissal of the Defendant’s request for an attachment order of an electronic tracking device against the Defendant even though the risk of recidivism against sexual crimes in the part of the attachment order is recognized

2. Determination

A. As to the grounds for appeal on the portion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor, the instant crime is an unfavorable circumstance against the Defendant, such as: (a) while the Defendant took care of the victim, who is a disabled person who is vulnerable to the Defendant’s crime, and temporarily waits at one’s own house, having sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of the victim’s mental disability to resist; (b) the nature of the crime is not good; (c) when the Defendant was investigated by the police in relation to each of the instant crimes, the Defendant escaped, and was arrested only one year and five months after the escape; and

However, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant has no record of being punished for the same kind of crime; (b) the victim’s physical violence is not deemed to have been used or threatened; and (c) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances surrounding the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment against the Defendant is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's above assertion are without merit.

(b) On the grounds of appeal regarding the part of a prosecutor’s attachment order case, recidivism of sexual crimes as provided by Article 5(1) of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders.