Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment (one year of imprisonment, etc.) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant and the person for whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor (i.e., the Defendant’s case) that the lower court rendered against the Defendant is too unfasible and unreasonable.

Shebly, the Defendant’s dismissal of the Defendant’s request for an attachment order against the Defendant despite high awareness of sexual assault, abnormal sexual exploitation, and the high risk of recidivism due to high awareness of sexual assault, it is unreasonable for the lower court to dismiss the Defendant’s request for attachment order.

2. Determination

A. Among the instant crimes on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor, the crime of rape and confinement among the instant crimes committed by the Defendant and the prosecutor constitutes rape by placing the victim in custody for a long time through “requirements South”, and thus, the relevant crime is not good.

The victim can easily see that he/she suffered a significant mental impulse due to the instant case, and the Defendant did not take any measures to recover the damage of the victim until the trial is held.

On the other hand, it would be reasonable to take into account the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of all of the instant crimes; (b) the Defendant violated his mistake while having committed the instant crimes; (c) the Defendant did not have any other penalty power except the punishment imposed by a fine for violating the Act on the Establishment of Local Reserve Funds for Three times; (d) the victims of the embezzlement of stolen property do not want the punishment of the Defendant; and (e) the Defendant was unable to lead a smooth social life due to the mental illness of personality disorder

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court determined that the Defendant was sentenced to punishment by comprehensively taking into account all the above conditions of sentencing.