The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. On June 18, 2018, the summary of the grounds for appeal submitted by the defense counsel to this court on June 18, 2018, includes the assertion of mistake of facts and attempted suspension. However, the defendant and defense counsel withdrawn the assertion of mistake of facts and attempted suspension on the first trial date.

A. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (nine years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Although there are special circumstances that prevent a criminal defendant from disclosing personal information, such as unfair disclosure and notification orders without risk of recidivism, the court below's order to disclose and notify the defendant's registered information for a period of five years is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The fact that the defendant recognizes the judgment of unfair sentencing as substitute for the crime, the defendant paid KRW 34 million to the victim, and the victim expressed his/her intention not to be punished against the defendant before the sentence after the conclusion of pleadings in the court below, and the fact that the defendant is the first offender is favorable.

However, the crime of this case was committed by senior citizens aged 73 years of age and has a thromatic disorder, and the victim who is vulnerable to the crime is a tool to resolve distorted sexual desire, and the victim was raped by drawing his name in a joint with others, and suffered injury that requires approximately 6 weeks of medical treatment, and the crime is very bad.

Although the Defendant’s accomplice inserted his sexual organ into the victim, it is sufficient for the accomplice to have taken into account the fact that he did not insert his sexual organ, in the case of joint rape, it is sufficient that the victim was injured, and the victim was not easily inserted, and the Defendant was merely unable to inserting his sexual organ, and the victim was also aware of his face by committing self-defluence in the victim’s side.

If so, the defendant did not inserting his sexual organ voluntarily.

It can not be assessed, and the quality of crime is less than that of accomplices.

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. It is difficult for a victim to measure the crime of this case.