Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor is dismissed.

The request for the attachment order of this case is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order to the extent that the pertinent facts charged were specified to the extent that the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) can exercise their right of defense by stating both the date, time, place, and method of the crime in the same manner as the date, place, and method of the crime.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the above facts charged guilty, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding legal principles as to the specification of facts charged, which affected the judgment.

2) The Defendant did not have sexual intercourse or act of similarity with a victim four times.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the above charges guilty on the grounds of the victim's statement that falls short of credibility, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

3) Sentencing of the lower judgment’s unfair sentencing (a punishment of 12 years of imprisonment, orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs 40 hours, orders to disclose information between 10 years and 10 years) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentencing of the lower judgment by the prosecutor (unfair sentencing) is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination:

A. As a general rule on the Defendant’s assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine requires that the date and time, place, and method of a crime be specified. As such, the time and time of a crime should be stated to the extent that it does not conflict with those of double prosecution or prescription, and the purport of the law demanding the specification of the facts charged by such elements is to facilitate the exercise of the Defendant’s right to defense. As such, it is sufficient that the facts constituting the element of the charges are stated to the extent that the facts constituting the element of the crime are recognizable to other facts, and even if the date, place, etc. of the crime are not specified in the indictment, the general indication is inevitable in light of the nature of the crime of prosecution, and it is also necessary to do so.