The judgment below

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

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

(b) the defendant;

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable for the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”).

B. Prosecutor 1) The lower court’s sentence of the Defendant case is too unfilled and unreasonable. 2) The Defendant need to attach a location tracking electronic device because of the high risk of repeating sexual crimes.

Nevertheless, it is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the request for the attachment order of this case.

2. Determination

A. The instant case claiming unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor is an indecent act committed by the Defendant on two occasions against a juvenile, who was well aware of his family members, and the nature of the instant crime is bad, and the victim seems to have suffered serious sexual humiliation and mental suffering due to the instant crime, and the fact that the victim did not receive any tolerance from the victim is disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the defendant repents his mistake, the fact that the defendant deposited 6.5 million won for the victim in the trial, and the fact that the defendant has no record of crime sentenced to a fine exceeding the fine is favorable to the defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, circumstances surrounding the instant crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., it is deemed that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy.

B. The lower court in the case claiming an attachment order against the Defendant: (a) as a result of the risk assessment of the Defendant’s Korean sex offender (KSORAS), falls under the intermediate level of 7 points in total; and (b) as a result of the assessment of the pre-psying of mentally ill persons (PC-R); (c) there was no history of punishment for sexual crimes before the instant case; and (d) each of the instant crimes was in the relationship between the Defendant and the victim’s family members; and thus, (e) it is deemed that the Defendant’s sexual assault recidivism was committed based on the birth of the Defendant.