Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable for the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. The instant crime committed on the part of the Defendant requires strict punishment against the Defendant, in consideration of the following: (a) the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter the Defendant) invaded into a high school over a number of times and forced the victim D, etc. to commit an indecent act; (b) the victim F, etc., who is a child or juvenile, was forced to commit an indecent act in front of the fact that the crime is not good; and (c) the Defendant did not agree with the victims up to the trial.

However, the Defendant’s mistake is divided, and the crime of this case is in the concurrent relationship between the crime of indecent act, etc. for which judgment has become final and conclusive and the crime of this case is concurrent crimes by the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the conditions of sentencing specified in the present pleading, such as the Defendant’s age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed appropriate, and is too heavy or unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant and the prosecutor’s above assertion are without merit.

B. The part of the case pertaining to the attachment order is deemed to have filed an appeal regarding the case pertaining to the attachment order under Article 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and the Attachment of Electronic Devices (hereinafter “Electronic Devices Attachment Act”). However, as long as the prosecutor filed an appeal regarding the case pertaining to the attachment order, the prosecutor did not submit a legitimate ground for appeal regarding the case pertaining to the attachment order, and the petition of appeal submitted by the prosecutor does not contain any indication of the grounds for appeal regarding this part and the record is not examined.

3. Conclusion.