The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The defendant shall be 40 hours.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentencing is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the request for attachment order by the criminal defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “the criminal defendant”) despite the risk of recidivism of sexual crimes.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the fact that the defendant recognized the error of the defendant on the assertion of unfair sentencing and is against his/her duty to receive medical treatment for the existence of alcohol in the future is favorable to the defendant.

However, the Defendant committed a crime of indecent act by compulsion of the victim F, who intruded on female toilets and stolen the form of the victim F, and was arrested as a result of the Defendant’s release, and thus, the Defendant committed a crime of indecent act by force, such as the victim C, etc., by using sparing the victim’s name and drinking the chest several times. In light of the process, method, etc. of each of the crimes of this case, it is not very good that the crime is committed.

Although each of the crimes of this case appears to have suffered severe fears and physical and mental pain, the victims have not yet received a letter of relief from the victims.

Furthermore, the Defendant committed the instant crime, even though he had the record of suspended sentence of imprisonment and of fine due to the commission of a law almost similar to the instant indecent act by force, and accordingly, committed each of the instant crimes. Therefore, the Defendant seems to have to have been sentenced to a sentence equivalent thereto.

Such circumstances are disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, in full view of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances after the commission of the crime, and the relationship with the victims, the sentencing of the lower court is deemed to be unfair because it is too unreasonable (However, the main sentence that the lower court rendered in consideration of the favorable circumstances mentioned above is partially mitigated). The prosecutor’s assertion of unfair

B. The allegation that the request for attachment order was dismissed is unjust.