Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable for the lower court’s punishment (ten years of imprisonment, 80 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs, and 10 years of disclosure and notification, respectively) against the Defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”).

2. The circumstances favorable to the Defendant include: (a) there is no specific power to commit a crime against the victim E before he commits a crime against the victim E; (b) the fact that all of the crimes are recognized and the fact that the amount taken by force is relatively small; and (c) the amount taken by force is relatively small.

However, each of the crimes of this case committed each of the crimes of this case at night by the defendant threatening the victim E who returned home at night with a deadly weapon, and led the above victim E to the night, rape, according to the victim F, and led the victim by threatening the victim with a deadly weapon, and by threatening the victim to the near future, and, in light of the circumstances, method of the crime, frequency of the crime, etc., the crime is not poor; the defendant planned to commit each of the crimes of this case, such as preparing in advance the excessive amount of a deadly weapon for the crime; each of the crimes of this case committed each of the crimes of this case; the victims were suffering from physical and mental pain; the defendant did not completely recover from damage to the victim; however, considering all of the sentencing conditions of the defendant in this case including age, character and conduct, motive, means and result of the crime, etc., and the result of the crime after the crime, the court below's decision is unreasonable, considering that the defendant's application of sentencing guidelines is too inappropriate compared to the sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.

3. The probation and electronic device against a specific criminal, as long as the criminal defendant filed an appeal against the part of the judgment below regarding the defendant's case.