The judgment below

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

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

. Information on the Defendant.

1. Notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, the lower court rendered a judgment that found the Defendant guilty on the part of the case and that dismissed the prosecutor’s request regarding the part of the case of the attachment order, and that only the Defendant appealed on the part of the case of the attachment order, and thus, the part of the case is excluded from the scope of the judgment in this Court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. At the time of each of the instant offenses, the Defendant and the requester for medical treatment and custody (hereinafter “Defendant”) were in a state of mental suffering from mental illness, such as a dives disorder at the time of the instant offenses.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

3. According to the statement of the written mental appraisal of the defendant of the Medical Treatment and Custody Director by the court's entrustment of mental appraisal of this case, it is reasonable to view that the defendant was in a state of mental disorder in which the mental disorder of specific impossibility at the time of each of the crimes of this case, the defendant, at I Q 66, shows that intelligence at present shows the overall development disorder of specific impossibility, and the overall development disorder of a woman's hand, and the woman's hand has sexual intercourse excessively and excessively collected sexually. In full view of the motive, process, means and attitudes of the crime of this case, and the defendant's behavior before and after the crime of this case, it is presumed that the mental state at the time of each of the crimes of this case was presumed that the above mental state at the time of each of the crimes of this case was presumed to have been mental state. Thus, it is reasonable to view that the defendant had a state of mental disorder in general development of specific impossibility at the time of each of

Therefore, the defendant's argument of mental disability is justified.

4. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is reasonable and without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing.