The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The 4 years of imprisonment with prison labor for each of the crimes listed in the 2-A, C-1, and (2) of the judgment of the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Part 1 of the Defendant case: Defendant and the person requesting attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”)

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable, on the ground that there was no fact that rape or sexual intercourse was committed, and that there was no indecent act by force. (2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to order the defendant to attach an electronic tracking device although the defendant does not pose a risk of recommitting a sexual crime.

2. Determination

A. 1) The judgment of the court below also has the same assertion as the grounds for appeal in this part. The court below rejected the defendant's assertion and its determination in detail under the title of the "Determination on the argument of the defendant and his defense counsel" in the judgment of the court below. The court below held that it is reasonable to view that all of the defendant's statements including the victim, including the victim of relevant legal principles, are sufficiently proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the abuse of rape or coercion by force on nine occasions as in the judgment of the court below, reliance on the victim's statement in the court of the court below. 2) The judgment of the court below should not be dismissed without permission unless there are any other reliable evidence to deem that the witness's statement, including the victim of relevant legal principles, is consistent and consistent with the facts charged, in view of the above legal principles, unless the court below's judgment and the court below's legitimate reasoning acknowledged that the defendant's indecent act was committed by rape or by force on nine or more occasions as the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

(1)