The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

In addition, a person who requests an attachment order shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

except that this judgment.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

In addition, the punishment (two years of imprisonment, etc.) imposed by the court below on the defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") is too unreasonable.

The sentence sentenced by the court below of the defendant's case is too unfasible and unfair.

It is improper for the court below to dismiss the defendant's request for attachment order even though he/she is likely to repeat a sexual crime.

Judgment

The defendant's case (the assertion of unfair sentencing by both parties) has not yet established the concept and ability to judge sexual intercourses with the victim of ten years of age and three times of age.

However, the defendant agreed with the legal representative of the victim and submitted to this court a written agreement to the effect that the victim seeks the maximum preference against the defendant.

In addition to these circumstances, the court below's punishment seems to be excessively unreasonable in light of all the sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments in this case, including the character, conduct, growth environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, and the sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court Sentencing Committee.

Therefore, the defendant's argument is reasonable and the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

In light of the relevant provisions of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders with respect to the case claiming an attachment order, where the judgment of the court below is unlawful and the part of the court below's case concerning the prosecuted case is reversed, the part concerning the case claiming an attachment order to be tried together with the examination and the judgment shall not be reversed.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do5291, 2012 Jeondo112, Jun. 28, 2012). In conclusion, the Defendant’s appeal regarding the part of the Defendant’s case among the lower judgment is with merit, and there is a ground for ex officio reversal as seen earlier in the part of the lower judgment regarding the claim for attachment