The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. It is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the request for attachment order, inasmuch as the victim under the age of 19 has committed a sexual crime against the victim and is in danger of repeating the crime.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the need for the attachment of an electronic device should be carefully considered, considering the following: (a) the person subject to the request for the attachment order has no record of punishment for a sexual crime except for the instant crime; (b) the degree of risk of a sexual offender committed by the person subject to the request for the attachment order to whom the request for the attachment order was made, as a result of the application of the Korea risk assessment map (K-SAS) to the person subject to the request for the attachment order, the investigator who investigated before the request for the attachment order to the electronic device attachment order to which the person subject to the request for the attachment order was made, is unlikely to recommit a sexual crime; and (c) the fact that the person subject to the request for the attachment order has been sentenced to imprisonment in depth and is likely to have been impreced while committing the instant crime; and (d) it is difficult to deem

B. In light of the fact that the person subject to the request for attachment order has committed an assault to prevent the victim from reporting the attachment order, and partly denied the crime that has committed an assault to force the victim to commit the crime, the court asserts that the person subject to the request for attachment order should order the person subject to attachment order to attach an electronic tracking device, since

However, examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in light of the records and relevant legal principles, even if the prosecutor’s assertion is fully considered, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error by misapprehending the facts or by

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and thus, Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. for Specific Criminal Offenders.