The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for four years from the date of the final judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Considering that the defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested by the defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “the defendant”) have no record of criminal punishment for the same crime, the sentence of the court below (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal (1) denying the Defendant’s criminal act and the victim’s guardian wishes to punish the Defendant, the lower court’s punishment is too unjustifiable.

(2) The lower judgment dismissing the Defendant’s request for the attachment order of this case in full view of the degree of assessment of the recidivism risk of the Defendant in the attachment order.

2. Determination

A. As to the Defendant and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant’s indecent act by force against female children under six years of age is deemed to have suffered a lot of mental suffering from the victim and his/her guardian, the circumstances of the crime are not good.

However, in full view of the following factors: (a) the Defendant recognized a crime only when it was in the first instance trial, and recognized the Defendant’s mistake in depth; (b) the Defendant’s guardian has not been punished by the Defendant’s consent with the victim’s guardian; (c) the elderly Defendant was detained for a relatively long period of time in the instant case; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive of the crime, means and consequence of the crime; and (e) various conditions of sentencing specified in the argument of the instant case, including the circumstances after the crime, and the recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Sentencing Commission, the lower court’

Therefore, the defendant's argument is reasonable, and the prosecutor's argument on this part is without merit.

B. The prosecutor’s judgment on this part of the grounds for appeal regarding an attachment order case shall be conducted ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, and the probation and attachment of an electronic device against a specific criminal.