The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

For a period of five years against a person who has requested an attachment order.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant and the applicant for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) (five years of imprisonment, five years of attachment order of an electronic device, five years of attachment order of an electronic device, and matters to be observed) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below against the defendant is too unfortunate and unfair.

2. Each of the instant offenses pertaining to the part of the Defendant case is a normal situation unfavorable to the Defendant, such as: (a) each of the instant offenses committed by the Defendant, on five occasions, by force, a similar act in gathering fingers from a sports center where the Defendant was working as a social service personnel, to the port of the victim (seven years) who gets a swimming course by force; and (b) the nature of the relevant crime and method of committing the crime is very poor; and (c) thereby, the victim in the process of forming a sexual identity and values is deemed to have suffered a very large mental or physical shock.

However, all of the crimes of this case are recognized by the Defendant, and when the Defendant was in the first instance, the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 10 million to the parents of the victim who is a legal representative of the victim, and the parents of the victim do not want to punish the Defendant, and the Defendant is the first offender who has no record of criminal punishment, etc., in favor of the Defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, all of the sentencing conditions shown in the arguments, such as the circumstances after the crime, and the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Supreme Court sentencing committee, it is recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's improper argument of sentencing is justified, and the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing is without merit.

3. Determination on the part of the request for attachment order is based on Article 9(5) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and the Electronic Monitoring, Etc.