The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

However, for a period of three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Illegal sentencing [the sentencing (the two years and six years of imprisonment, the suspended execution period of three years, the observation of protection, and the lecture of sexual assault treatment; 80 hours of the disclosure notification order; 3 years of the disclosure notification order] imposed by the court below (the prosecutor and the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “the defendant”)] is too heavy or unreasonable.

B. 1) It is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for a period of three years pursuant to Article 28(1) of the Electronic Monitoring Act, even if the Defendant did not attach an electronic tracking device, even if it is well implemented during the period of protection observation.

2) Since the Defendant was in danger of reoffending, the lower judgment ordering the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device only during the period of protection observation is unreasonable, even though it is necessary to attach an electronic tracking device for 10 years.

2. Determination

A. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she was investigated by an investigative agency due to the suspicion of an indecent act committed by force in 2010 and was subject to a non-prosecution disposition (not subject to prosecution) by agreement with the victim.

The crime of this case is an indecent act committed by the victim's her son, her son, and her son, her son, her son, her son, and her son, who her son, her son, her son, and her son, while her son, her son, her son, and her son, who her son, her son, her son, and her son was committed by the victim. In light of the motive

Although the victim was suffering from considerable mental impulse due to the crime of this case, he did not agree with the victim.

However, there is no record that the defendant has been subject to criminal punishment as well as for the same crime, and it is against his depth by recognizing the crime from the investigative agency.

The type of force used by the defendant and the degree of indecent act was relatively weak.

The defendant is still young at 24 years of age and the defendant is able to observe the protection.