The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request regarding the part of the case of the defendant, and regarding the case of the case of the attachment order, the part of the case of the attachment order, as the defendant appealed only against it, has no interest in appeal, and thus, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, the part of the request for the attachment order is excluded from the scope of the judgment of the court.

2. In full view of the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments, such as the fact that the defendant was punished twice as the same crime, and that the defendant committed the instant crime without being aware of it during the period of suspension of execution due to the same crime, and that the victim seems to have received a considerable amount of mental impulses as the instant crime, among various sentencing factors, the defendant among the various sentencing factors, is led to the confession and reflection of all the crimes, the victim does not want to use and punish the defendant, and the defendant seems to have led to the instant crime by drinking. However, even if the court’s punishment against the defendant is too excessive, it cannot be said that it goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

Defendant’s assertion that the sentence of the court below is unreasonable is rejected.

3. Conclusion, the appeal by the defendant is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit, and ex officio, in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulation on Criminal Procedure, the appeal by the defendant is corrected as "E (E, 59 years old)" in the second five parallels of the sentence of the judgment below as "E (E, 49 years old)".