The judgment below

The part of the case of the defendant is reversed.

Defendant

In addition, a person who requests an attachment order shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Part 1 of the case by the Defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) issued by the lower court to the Defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) are too unreasonable because the sentence (such as imprisonment with prison labor for three years) imposed by the Defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) is too unreasonable (the Defendant also stated the grounds for appeal by misunderstanding the facts and misapprehending the legal principles as well as misunderstanding the reasoning of the appeal directly prepared and submitted by him, but the Defendant revoked the assertion of misunderstanding the above facts and misapprehension of the legal principles at the first oral argument of the first instance trial, and thus, the Prosecutor did not separately determine the sentencing).

B) Although the court below exempted the Defendant from disclosure notification of personal information in light of the process, details, means, and methods of each of the crimes of this case committed by the Defendant, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to disclosure notification of personal information, or by misapprehending the legal principles as to disclosure notification of personal information.

B. It is unreasonable for the lower court to dismiss the Defendant’s request for the attachment order of this case, despite the risk of repeating a sex crime.

2. Determination

A. The part 1 of the case against the unfair argument of sentencing is a favorable condition for the defendant, such as the following: (a) the defendant made a confession of all of the crimes of this case from the investigative agency to the trial court of the trial; (b) the defendant made an agreement with the victim by paying 5 million won as agreed money to the victim; (c) the victim expressed his intention not to be punished against the defendant; (d) the defendant did not have any criminal record subject to punishment for sexual crimes; (e) there was no criminal record subject to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment; and (e) the defendant supported the wife who is the disabled.

However, each of the crimes of this case committed by the defendant is recorded in the judgment of the court below.