Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) committed a mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles regarding the part concerning the Defendant’s case (A) and the Defendant’s hand on the part of the victim’s sexual organ. However, at the time, the victim was aware of certain degree, and thus did not have any condition to resist or resist the victim, and there was no intention for the Defendant to commit an indecent act by taking advantage of the victim’s mental or physical condition or the state to resist.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles.

B) Although there are special circumstances under which the lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment, etc.) disclosure, notification, or restriction on employment should not be disclosed or notified to the public or restricted employment of the accused, it is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to disclose, notify, or restrict employment of, personal information.

2) Although the part of the case where the Defendant applied for an attachment order does not recognize the recidivism of sexual crimes and the risk of recidivism, it is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device to the Defendant. (b) Since the witness’s statement at the time of the crime under mistake of facts (not guilty part in the grounds) E is reliable, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges, even though it was found that the Defendant committed an indecent act with the victim’s chest was committed by committing an indecent act

2. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court as to the allegation of mistake of facts by the Defendant in the part of the Defendant case No. 1, the Defendant recognized the fact that the Defendant was able to enjoy in the victim’s side who was locked as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the lower judgment, and that the Defendant was guilty of the victim