All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment imposed by the lower court (a three-year imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor (unfairness in form, and improper exemption from disclosure notification) 1) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unfair sentencing is unreasonable as it is too uneasible. 2) Although there are no special circumstances that may not disclose and notify the personal information of the criminal defendant who was unreasonably exempted from disclosure notification order, the lower court exempted the Defendant from disclosure notification order.

2. Determination

A. In the appellate court’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing between both parties, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and where the first instance court’s sentencing does not exceed the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no meaningful change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment in the appellate court.

The following are circumstances: (a) the Defendant attempted to rape a victim with intellectual disability 2 with a well-known knowledge that he/she has a disability to ordinary victims; (b) was guilty of attempted rape in light of the background and details of the crime; (c) the victim was suffering from considerable physical and mental shock and pain due to the instant crime; (d) the Defendant did not have made efforts to recover the victim’s damage; (c) the Defendant did not receive a letter from the victim; and (d) the Defendant again committed the instant crime even though he/she had been under suspended execution after having been sentenced to a suspended sentence due to injury, which are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, there are circumstances favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant led to the confession of the crime of this case and the mistake, the fact that the crime of this case was committed in attempted crimes, and that the defendant has no same criminal record.

Comprehensively taking account of the above circumstances and various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing as seen earlier in the trial process of this case, the lower court is the Defendant.