The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the part of the Defendant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court to the Defendant and the person for whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “defendants”) (two years of imprisonment and six years of suspension of execution) is too uneased and unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the Defendant’s request for the attachment order of this case even if the need to attach an electronic tracking device is recognized in light of the risk of recidivism in part of the attachment order case.

2. Determination

A. In light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime against a child under the age of judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant’s liability is not somewhat weak.

However, the crime of this case appears to be contingent, and there is no other criminal records including sexual crimes except that the defendant was punished as a fine for attempted larceny in 1999. In full view of various sentencing conditions as shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, circumstances and contents of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is not determined that the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.

B. According to Articles 9(4)4 and 28(1) of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders as to the assertion of the case regarding an attachment order, in principle, a request for the attachment order shall be dismissed when a suspended sentence is rendered with respect to a specific crime case: Provided, That when a suspended sentence is rendered with respect to the specific crime case, a request for the attachment order may be dismissed: Provided, That the attachment of an electronic device may be ordered to verify whether

In light of the above, the sentencing of the court below, which sentenced the suspended sentence against the defendant, is not recognized to be unfair, and according to the results of the investigation before the defendant's claim, the risk of recidivism against the defendant is the risk of recidivism against Korean sex offender.