Defendant

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

The summary of the grounds for appeal and the person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant A”) issued by the lower court to the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant A”) are deemed to be too unreasonable.

The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendants (the 10-year imprisonment, and the 2-year suspended sentence of Defendant B: 10-year imprisonment) is too unfortunate and unfair.

It is improper that the court below's dismissal of a request for an attachment order by a prosecutor against Defendant A, which is obvious that the risk of recidivism, is dismissed.

Judgment

In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court in the part of the Defendant case, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court since new materials on sentencing have not been submitted at the trial, and there was no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court. In full view of all of the reasons for sentencing as stated by the lower court, the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of each discretion, as the lower court’s sentencing of Defendant A is too heavy or unhued, or the sentencing of Defendant B is too low or too low,

It is difficult to see it.

Defendant

The grounds for appeal by A and the Prosecutor are without merit.

The lower court on the part of the claim for attachment order: (a) there is a probable probability that Defendant A may depict legal peace by committing a sex offense again in the future, taking into account the circumstances indicated in its reasoning

It is difficult to conclude it.

On the other hand, the prosecutor's request for attachment order against the defendant A was dismissed.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in comparison with relevant legal principles and records, the lower court’s dismissal of the request for the attachment order of this case is justifiable.

This part of the appeal by the prosecutor is without merit.

Therefore, the appeal by the defendant A and the prosecutor against the defendants is without merit.