The part of the defendant's case among the judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

For the defendant.

1. The court below dismissed the prosecutor’s request regarding the part of the attachment order case, and convicted and sentenced three years of imprisonment with prison labor for the part of the defendant’s case. Since only the defendant appealed, there is no interest in appeal regarding the attachment order case.

Therefore, Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, a legal fiction of appeal, does not apply (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 82Do2476, Dec. 14, 1982; 201Do6705, 201Do20, Aug. 25, 201); and an attachment order case against the Defendant is excluded from the scope of the trial of this Court.

Therefore, the scope of this court's adjudication is limited to the defendant's case which was pronounced guilty by the court below.

2. The decision of the court below against the defendant in light of the summary of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of three years, the order to complete sexual assault treatment programs with 80 hours, the disclosure of information five years, and the notification information) is too unreasonable.

3. The crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, where the defendant committed an indecent act by forcing the victim under 9 years of age by deceiving her chest and sound part about 10 months of age, or committed an indecent act against the victim in a state where the victim is unable to resist any crepit or to resist any crepit, and the crime of this case is not very good, and the victim appears to have suffered considerable mental shock and damage.

However, the defendant reflects the crime of this case in depth, and is divided, and the defendant left his previous place of residence at the time of detention and returned to the victim again, and does not stop the same crime of this case. The victim's person with parental authority and the mother of the victim want to prevent the defendant from spreading the victim, and the victim also wanted to take a preference against the defendant, from the court below to the trial.