The judgment below

The part concerning the claim for attachment order among the cases shall be reversed, and this part of the case shall be the Busan High Court.

1. The grounds of appeal concerning the accused case are examined.

Defendant

In addition, examining various circumstances, such as the age, behavior intelligence and environment of the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the “defendant”), the motive, means and consequence of the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing conditions indicated in the records cannot be deemed as having been significantly unfair, even if considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant, the lower court’s sentencing that sentenced the Defendant for 10 years, 10 years, and 10 years, and 10 years, of the disclosure order

2. As to the case of the request for attachment order

A. The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, where Article 9 (1) 1 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders (hereinafter “Electronic Monitoring Act”) committed a specific crime under the age of 19, the upper court ordered the victim to attach an electronic device within a period of 20 to 30 years, where the upper limit of statutory punishment is death penalty or life imprisonment, and Article 9 (2) of the same Act stipulates that when issuing an attachment order at the same time for several specific crimes, the amount of statutory punishment shall be increased by 1/2 of the upper limit of the period of attachment of the most severe crime. The specific crimes of this case committed by the Defendant constitute rape injury including life imprisonment in the upper limit of statutory punishment, and violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and the period of attachment falls within 20 to 30 years, and if the specific crimes have increased by 1/2 of the upper limit of the period of attachment determined for rape injury, the court below reversed the judgment of first instance against the Defendant to attach the electronic device for 20 years.

However, the above determination by the court below is for the following reasons.