The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence (five years of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court on the Defendant and the person who filed the custody order and the person who filed the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) is deemed unreasonable.

B. It is improper for the court below to dismiss the defendant's request for attachment order even if the defendant's request for attachment order risks repeating a crime

2. Determination

A. The defendant's crime of this case committed by the defendant was attempted to kill the elderly victim with a view to glass view, etc. as stated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below. The crime of this case committed by the defendant was committed in the same manner as indicated in the facts of the crime in the judgment below, and the crime of this case was committed in light of the details, means and methods of the crime, the result, the degree of damage suffered by the victim, etc., and the nature of the crime is not less and less severe, and the physical suffering and mental shock caused by the crime in this case are not significant, and the damage is deemed to be difficult to recover easily, and there is no unfavorable circumstance, such as the fact that the victim did not have reached an agreement or failed to recover full damage with the victim. However, the defendant

In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was suffering from the mental illness of the Cho Jae-dong disease; (b) the Defendant suffered from such mental illness; and (c) the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical weakness at the time of committing the instant crime due to the loss of damage, actual verification, and the decline in the ability to coordinate impulse; (d) there was no history of having been sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment; and (e) other circumstances that are conditions for sentencing of the instant case, such as the Defendant’s age, occupation, circumstances after committing the instant crime, environment, etc., the Defendant’s punishment imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unfair.

B. As to the Defendant’s request for attachment order of an electronic device on the part of the Defendant’s request for attachment order, the lower court based on its stated reasoning.