Defendant

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

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) and the person who requested to attach an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) asserted that the sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor asserts that the sentencing of the lower court is too unfluent and unfair.

2. Determination

A. There is no change in the sentencing conditions compared with the judgment of the court below on the grounds for appeal, and where the sentencing of the court below does not deviate from the reasonable scope of the discretion, it is reasonable to respect them (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). Circumstances asserted by the defendant and the prosecutor as the sentencing factors in this court are already discovered in the hearing process of the court below, or sufficiently considered in determining the punishment against the defendant, and no change in circumstances exists in the sentencing guidelines with regard to the matters subject to the sentencing conditions after the court below was sentenced.

In light of the circumstances revealed by the lower court on the grounds of sentencing, where the lower court comprehensively takes into account the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, family relation, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., the conditions of the instant argument and the sentencing indicated in the record, and the scope of the recommended sentencing guidelines based on the sentencing guidelines, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentencing is too heavy or unreasonable as it was conducted within the reasonable scope of its discretion, even if both parties were to file an appeal.

All the arguments of the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit.

B. The part regarding the request for attachment order (including an ex officio protective order) is deemed to have filed an appeal regarding the claim for attachment order under Articles 9(8) and 21-8 of the Act on the Attachment, etc. of Electronic Devices and the protective observation order ex officio rendered by the lower court, inasmuch as the Defendant and the prosecutor filed an appeal against the Defendant case. However, the petition of appeal and the reasons for appeal submitted by the Defendant and the Prosecutor are not stated in the grounds for appeal, and the records are examined in this part.