Defendant

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

The court's scope of the judgment of this court is that the accused and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as "defendants") order the attachment of an electronic tracking device for ten years with respect to the case of the accused accused case and the case of the attachment order, the court rendered a ruling dismissing the prosecutor's request for the case of the probation order, and there is no benefit of appeal as to the probation order.

Therefore, notwithstanding the provisions of Articles 21-8 and 9(8) of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders (hereinafter “Electronic Monitoring Act”), the scope of the trial of this court is limited to the defendant's case and the attachment order case, and the probation order case is excluded.

In regard to a case involving a mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant was in the state of mental disorder due to the symptoms of alcohol and the symptoms of the hallception at the time of the instant crime.

Since the defendant does not pose a risk of repeating an attachment order, it is unreasonable to impose the defendant an attachment order and matters to be observed.

The sentence of unfair sentencing (15 years of imprisonment) by the court below is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In regard to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant also asserted the same as the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court determined that the Defendant did not appear to have reached a state where the ability to discern things or make decisions was lost due to mental state induced by alcohol at the time of preventing the instant crime, even though it is recognized that the Defendant was in a state where the mental state induced by alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime was in a state where the ability to discern things or make decisions was lost.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in light of the records, the judgment of the court below is reasonable.