Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order shall be dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles: As to the crimes Nos. 1 and 2 of the judgment of the court below, the defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as "defendant") did not have a sexual intercourse with the victim at a singing room on February 9, 2014.

On February 9, 2014, the Defendant: (a) interested in the victim’s horse that he walked in his body; (b) broken the beer’s body by breaking the beer’s body; and (c) the victim took the Defendant’s hand to the effect that he would leave the beer’s talk with the defect of the male beer, but there was no threat to the victim’s beer’s beer’s beer’s beer’s beer’s beer.

The defendant has reached a compromise in a singing room, and only has sexual intercourses under the agreement to move to the singing room which the victim wants, and has no rape by threatening the victim.

The sentence (five years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of No. 1, 2, and 3 on the market, and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crimes of No. 4 on the ruling) of the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

It is improper that the court below ordered the defendant to disclose or notify (10 years for the crime No. 1 and No. 2 in the market) of the disclosure or notification order.

It is improper that the court below ordered the defendant to attach an electronic tracking device (10 years).

Judgment

In the lower court’s determination of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant argued to the effect similar to the above grounds for appeal, and the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion and its determination in detail under the title of “decision on the First and Second Crimes as to the Defendant and his defense counsel”. The lower court, based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., ① occupational relationship between the Defendant and the victim, and the Defendant and the victim.