The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The lower court rejected the prosecutor’s request to attach an attachment order on the ground that it is difficult to deem that the Defendant is likely to recommit a sexual crime, while sentencing five years of imprisonment, etc., by recognizing the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case.

As to this, only the Defendant appealed on the ground of mistake of facts and unreasonable sentencing regarding the judgment below, the part of the judgment below’s request for attachment order does not have interest in appeal

(1) Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, the part of the request for attachment order is excluded from the scope of the trial of this court. Thus, the scope of the trial of this court is limited to the part of the Defendant case except the part of the request for attachment order among the judgment below.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the Defendant did not have raped the victim or inflicted an injury on the victim at the time and place of the charge, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (five years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. 1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts is based on the precedents, rules of evidence, and evidence concerning the criteria for determining the credibility of statements made by a person who asserts that he/she is a sexual assault victim. 2) The Defendant also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in the lower court, and the lower court rejected the above assertion in detail under the title “decision on the Defendant and his/her defense counsel’s assertion”.

In particular, the examination date and the doctor's diagnosis date of the facts of the crime of law are the same day, and there is no circumstance to suspect that the disease or injury stated in the medical certificate was caused by the third cause, and the above judgment of the court below is closely compared with the records.