The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

The seized knife (Do).

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

In addition, a victim subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as "defendant") misjudgments about the part of the defendant's case by himself/herself in order to obtain the drinking value, and the defendant found excessive points on the floor of the bed and attempted to find them, and there was no fact that the defendant attempted to rape the victim.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant based on the victim's statement is erroneous in misconception of facts.

The imprisonment (five years of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

It is unfair that the court below ordered the defendant to disclose personal information.

The court below's decision on the case of the attachment order is improper to issue a location tracking device attachment order to the defendant.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendant is too uncomfortable.

Judgment

Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor due to the amendment to indictment on the part of the defendant case, the prosecutor added "Article 3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Specific Crimes" to the applicable provisions of the indictment in this case instead of withdrawing "Article 35 of the Criminal Act", and "a summary of the facts and evidence" as stated in paragraph (3) below, and since this court's permission changes the subject of the judgment, the part of the defendant case in the judgment below cannot be maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and the argument of improper disclosure of personal information is still subject to the judgment of this court.

The defendant is dissatisfied with the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts.