【Rape of Minors (A, partly Recognized to Defendant A)

Name of Crime: Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof

Violation of Law (Minor Rape, etc. under thirteen years of age)

(b) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes;

Similar acts of minors)

(c) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes;

Minor Quasi-rape, etc. [Recognized Crime: Sexual Crimes

Violation of the Punishment and Protection, etc. of Victims Act (13 years of age);

Attempted Rape, etc.)

(d) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes;

Indecent Act by compulsion of a minor (part of the defendant A)

Punishment of Sexual Crimes, Protection of Victims thereof, etc.

Violation of the Act (Minor Rape, etc. under thirteen years of age), part of it

Change of Crime: Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof.

Violation of the Act (Minor Rape, etc. under thirteen years of age)

(e) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes;

A) Rape (A)

name: Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims;

【Violation of the Rate (Rape in Relationship of Relatives】

(f) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes;

name of a crime recognized by the court: Punishment of a sexual crime;

Violation of the Protection, etc. of Victims Act (limited to relatives);

Attempted quasi-rape)

(g) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes;

A. A. part of the defendant's indecent act

Punishment of Sexual Crimes, Protection of Victims thereof, etc.

Violation of the Act (Indecent Act by indecent act in relation to relatives), some of them;

Change of Crime: Punishment of Sexual Crimes, Protection of Victims, etc.

Violation of the Act (Indecent Act by Compulsion in Relation of Relatives)

2014Electric No. 116 (Joint Attachment Orders)

Attorney D (for the defendant A)

High 74(Joint Judgment) Judgment

To the Defendants each order the completion of the sexual assault treatment program for 40 hours. Information on Defendant B for seven years, and information on Defendant A for five years (However, the summary of the sex offense notified to Defendant B is limited to the offense described in Article 1-2(b) of the judgment, and the summary of the sex offense notified to Defendant A is limited to the offense described in Article 2-4(d) of the judgment.

Of the judgment of the court below regarding Defendant B, the prosecutor’s appeal on the non-guilty part of the Defendant’s case and the non-guilty part concerning Defendant A’s indecent act by compulsion on early August 2009 and the appeal filed by the respondent B and the prosecutor on the part regarding the case regarding the attachment order attachment order claim against Defendant B against the respondent B is dismissed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant and the respondent B of the attachment order

1) misunderstanding of facts - The judgment of the court below which found the defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") guilty of the crime of rape even though they did not rape the victim as stated in the facts charged.

(ii)the improper attachment order;

Although Defendant B did not rape the victim, it is unreasonable for the lower court to recognize the recidivism of sexual crimes and the risk of recidivism and to issue an attachment order on the premise that the crime of rape is found guilty.

B. Prosecutor - The acquitted portion of the judgment of the court below

1) The judgment of the court below which acquitted Defendant B on the ground that the victim’s statement about the crime committed by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act in 2010 was not consistent and contradictory, and thus the credibility of the statement is recognized, there is an error of law by mistake of facts or misapprehension

2) The part against Defendant A

Defendant A made a specific and clear confession of the facts charged in this case at an investigative agency as to paragraphs (a) through (c) of Article 2-1 of the facts charged in this case, and the victim does not specify the date and time of the crime itself, but the crime itself is clearly stated, so reinforcement evidence of the confession is also recognized. In addition, Article 2-4 of the facts charged is that the victim has made a very detailed statement as to the date and time of the crime. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below that acquitted Defendant A, even if all the facts charged against Defendant A

2. Judgment on the part concerning Defendant B

A. Judgment on Defendant B’s assertion

1) misunderstanding of facts

A) This part of the facts charged

The defendant is a person who has kinship with a victim as a third degree of relationship of the victim E.

(1) At the Defendant’s bar located in 2010, the Defendant: (a) laid the victim’s clothes (nine years of age, n, and knife); (b) laid off the victim’s clothes; and (c) laid off the victim’s clothes; (d) laid off the victim’s fingers; and (e) inserted his fingers into the victim’s sound part; and (e) inserted his fingers into the victim’s sound part.

Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim under the age of 13.

(2) On January 1, 2013 to February 2, 2013, the Defendant: (a) when the father of the victim was present at the victim’s home located in G (the victim was 12 years of age, n) and was towed by the victim’s knife that was covered by the victim’s knife; and (b) inserted his sexual organ into the part of the victim’s knife and the knife.

Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim under the age of 13.

B) The judgment of the court below

In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence presented by the court below as evidence of guilt, namely, ① there are no specific and mutually contradictory contents in the victim’s statement, and the victim’s statements are not known if the victim did not directly experience, and the victim’s statements are hard to find out obvious reasons or motives to identify the defendant, ② the victim’s statements are judged to be reliable; ② the statement of the victim, who is a statement analysis expert, repeatedly suffered rape from the defendant’s police officers more than two times, seems to be highly reliable; ③ the defendant stated in the investigative agency from 2008 to 2011 with the victim’s statement from 201 to 2010, etc., the court below found the defendant guilty of rape from 10 years to 201, as stated in the facts charged. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 21341, Jun. 1, 2009>

C) The judgment of this Court

In addition to the following circumstances acknowledged by the court below and duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable. Thus, Defendant B’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts is without merit.

① The victim stated in the police that the crime of paragraph (1) of the holding of the court below stated that "the vehicle was equipped with a room room at the time, and the toilet was fluored with a yellow fluor board" (the second victim’s video tape CD) and that "the third party went to the correct sexual organ with his/her fingerion because he/she was put in the finger-out part (the first victim’s video tape CD)" were reliable if he/she did not directly experience, it is difficult for the victim to make a statement. In addition, in the process of the statement, the victim stated that the date and place of the crime were not thought or known to him/her, and there is no special circumstance to deem that the victim made a false statement about the crime of the defendant B.

② The witness M of the lower court, which was the omission of the victim, stated as follows: “I am at the time of the third and fourth grade of the elementary school, I am aware of the Defendant B’s birth in the male room, and was the victim, and later, I am am hyke, and later I am hyke, I am hyke, and I am hyke.” (The trial record 210, 212 pages).

③ At the end of June, 2009, the witness P of the trial of the party: (a) the Defendant Company B leased the Defendant’s Republic of Korea farmland to P on the end of June, 2009 to the Defendant’s Republic of Korea; (b) the Defendant’s father’s work was known to have been listed in Gwangju, and (c) 4-5 times a year in South and North Korea, but there was no witness P; (d) it is match if there was no witness P; and (e) it is difficult to know that Defendant B has been personneled of P on every occasion in the Republic of Korea. (v) In light of the statements made by the above investigation agency in the Defendant B, it is difficult to believe the above testimony as it is, and even according to the above testimony, it does not interfere with the recognition of the facts charged.

2) Illegal assertion on attachment order

① The lower court affirmed the lower court’s determination on the following grounds: (a) Defendant B: (a) committed rape with the victim in winter around 2010 when he was living together with the victim; (b) committed rape again with the victim on January 2, 2013 through early February 2, 2013; (c) Defendant B committed rape with the victim on the part of the victim; (b) rape with the victim on the toilet (crime 1); (c) the degree of risk assessment of recidivism with the victim in Korea on the victim’s residence; and (d) the degree of risk of recidivism with the Defendant’s sex offender at the level of “high risk of recidivism”; and (e) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive of the crime in this case, and the details of the crime in this case, etc. were compared to the following facts: (a) Defendant B committed rape with the victim on the part of the victim’s residence; and (b) Defendant B did not have any legitimate ground for the lower court’s determination on the location and risk of recidivism of the sexual crime.

B. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake

1) Summary of this part of the facts charged

In 2010, the Defendant: (a) took care of the body of the victim E (the 9-year-old, female) who was a cell phone game in the room located in the Republic of Korea located in the Defendant’s Republic of Korea, and (b) took off the victim’s clothes; (c) exceeded her inner organ; (d) took off the victim’s grandchildren; and (e) laid down the victim’s fingers by her fingers; and (e) laid down the victim’s fingers by her fingers. Accordingly, the Defendant forced her fingers during the victim’s sexual organ under 13 years of age in kinship.

2) The judgment of the court below

The lower court consistently stated that “the following circumstances acknowledged by the original trial records” (i.e., (i) the victim had consistently engaged in poppy (NGY BID) game using smartphones at the time when he was forced by the Defendant from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court as stated in this part of the facts charged. The opening and unification of smartphones is around August 5, 201 (No. 10) and the opening and unification of smartphones (No. 10) was opened later than B, 2010, the day on which the crime indicated in the facts charged was committed, and (ii) the victim was found not guilty of indecent act (similar act) from the Defendant at the time of the first second year of the elementary school (208). In light of the aforementioned facts charged, it is difficult to view that the victim was not guilty at the time of the victim’s video recording statement or the victim’s video recording statement at the time of the prosecution and the possibility of the victim’s testimony at the same time as the above 20 years of the above facts charged.”

3) The judgment of this Court

The burden of proving the facts charged in a criminal trial has the burden of proving the facts charged in the criminal trial, and the conviction should be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to ensure the judge that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). If there is no such evidence, even if there is doubt as to the defendant's guilt, the interests of the defendant should be determined (Article 2012Do5301, Oct. 11, 2012). The above circumstances are based on the judgment of not guilty as to this part of the facts charged. In other words, the victim made a statement from the investigative agency to the court of the lower trial that he was forced by indecent act by force from the defendant as stated in the above facts charged, but the police and the prosecutor's office made a statement at the court of the lower court which stated that the time was the date of the second grade and fourth grade of the elementary school, and there is no reasonable ground to view that the defendant's statement was inconsistent with this part of the facts charged.

C. Ex officio determination

The appellate court shall judge the grounds included in the grounds for appeal: Provided, That it may decide ex officio on the grounds that affect the judgment (Article 364(1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act), even in cases where the grounds for appeal are not included in the grounds for appeal (Article 364(1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act); on the other hand, the grounds for appeal include “when there exist grounds to find that the amount of sentence is unreasonable” (Article 361-5 subparag. 15 of the same Act); and as above, the grounds that affect the judgment are not included in the grounds for appeal, but are subject to the appellate court’s judgment. Therefore, the appellate court may ex officio decide whether there exists any grounds to recognize that the sentencing is unfair, and if such grounds exist, it may reverse the judgment of the lower court and determine and sentence a minor sentence than the sentencing of the lower court (see Supreme Court Decision

Therefore, the decision of the court below on the propriety of the sentencing of Defendant B (eight years of imprisonment) is to be made ex officio. Each of the crimes of this case is to be considered to have been raped by the defendant on behalf of his own, on two occasions, the nature of the crime is very poor, and the victim seems to have suffered a very significant mental impulse in this process.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant has no record of criminal punishment, the victim and the father of the victim expressed their intention not to be punished for the time when the victim and the father of the victim have reached the trial, and other various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character, conduct, occupation and environment, motive and circumstance leading to the crime of this case, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.

D. As to the appeal regarding the part of the prosecutor’s request for the attachment order, the court below ordered the above defendant to attach an attachment order, and as long as the prosecutor filed an appeal against the above defendant against the defendant, it is deemed that the prosecutor filed an appeal regarding the case claiming the attachment order pursuant to Article 9(8) of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders. However, as to the attachment order, the prosecutor did not submit legitimate grounds for appeal as to the attachment order, and there is no reason to investigate and reverse this part ex officio.

3. Judgment on the part concerning Defendant A

A. Ex officio determination

Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the prosecutor examined ex officio the above facts in the first instance trial, and determined that "the date and time of the crime under Article 2-2 (1), (2), (3), and (4) of the former Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof (13 years or older)," and "the first instance court determined that "the first instance court changed the name of the crime under Article 7 (1), (2), and (3), and Article 8-2 (1), (3), and (4) of the former Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof" from " around January 2, 2010 to " around January 2, 2010," and "the second-mentioned date and time of the crime under Article 2-2 (2) to "the first instance court made a decision on the amendment of indictment" from "the first instance court made a decision on the amendment of indictment from January 2, 201 to "the first instance court made a decision on the amendment of indictment".

B. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake

1) This part of the facts charged

A) Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof (a) and the punishment of sexual crimes and violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims Thereof

(1) On August 1, 2009, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against a victim under 13 years of age, on the part of his knife E (8 years of age, women) who was seated above the Defendant’s knife at the Defendant’s knife house located in F in the Southernnam-gun of the Hannam-gun, 2009, by 3 to 4 times away from the victim’s knife.

(2) On January 2010, the Defendant reported a cartoon book to the floor with the victim (the age of 9 and female), along with the instant Defendant’s money room. On the ground that the victim was suffering, the Defendant rhyd the victim’s negative part into his clothes, and rhyd him with his fingers into his clothes, and rhyd the victim’s negative part between 2-3 minutes. Accordingly, the Defendant forced the victim under 13 years of age who was related to him to commit an indecent act.

B) Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof (a minor rape, etc. under the age of 13) and violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof (a relative relationship

Around January 2, 2010 to February 2, 2010, the Defendant visited the victim at the her father’s residence located G (the 9-year-old and female father) and was absent from the victim after the victim’s father went to work, and came to a mar between the victim and the victim, the Defendant laid down the mar of the victim’s mar in a bad manner, and then inserted the Defendant’s sexual organ into the mar of the victim. Accordingly, the Defendant raped the victim under 13 years of age who was in kinship.

C) Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof (Minor Rape, etc. under thirteen years of age) and violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof (rape-rape

On February 2, 2010, the Defendant: (a) taken the part of the victim (the victim (the victim (the victim of 9 years of age, women) who was divingd above his father’s house located in Gwangju Northern-gu Q, and her panty tyty sty sty sty sty sty sty sty sty sty sty sty sty sty sm on the victim’s bridge; and (b) inserted the victim’s sexual organ into the victim’

D) Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Minors under thirteen years of age) and violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

around July 201 to August 8, 201, the Defendant covered the instant Defendant’s clothes with the victim (10 years of age, 10 years of age) in a ward located in the front of the said Defendant’s money, and then inserted the Defendant’s sexual organ into the part of the victim’s sound.

Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim under the age of 13.

2) The judgment of the court below

A) Determination as to paragraphs (A) through (c) of the above facts charged

The court below found the defendant not guilty on the ground that the following circumstances acknowledged by the original trial record as to Item A (a) of the above facts charged, namely, ① the day when the defendant committed indecent act by force, such as the above facts charged, stated the victim as the first policeman not the first policeman of August 2009 but the first policeman of August 2008 as stated in the above facts charged, ② the victim stated that he had no memory from the defendant as mentioned in the above facts charged, ② the investigative agency stated that the victim was indecent act by force, while the court of the court of the court of the court below stated that he was indecent act by force as mentioned above, and that when time when time when time of such indecent act was committed, it is difficult to view that the defendant committed indecent act by force of the victim of August 209, 209 as mentioned in the above facts charged.

With respect to paragraphs (A)(2), (b) and (c) of the above facts charged, the lower court found that it is difficult to view that the substantial authenticity has been established as to the part on January 2, 2010, which the Defendant stated as the time of each crime described in paragraphs (a)(2), (b) and (c) and (c) of the above facts charged, such as “A, unlike the statement made by the prosecution,” and “A” (2) of the same Article, and the time when the victim committed rape or sexual intercourse with the victim as stated in paragraphs (b) and (c) of the above facts charged is not around January 2009, but also around January 2009 through around February 2, 2009; (3) the time when the victim made a statement of damage or the place of damage, and it is difficult to view that there is no reasonable evidence to prove that there is no specific confession or confession of each of the facts charged by the prosecution as to whether it is true or not.

B) Determination as to paragraph D of the above facts charged

원심은 위 공소사실 중 라)항에 대하여 '원심 기록에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정들 즉, ① 피고인은 수사기관 및 원심 법정에서 2011년경 R공고에 재학하면서 기숙사 생활을 하였고, 2011. 7. ~ 8.경은 고등학교 여름방학 기간으로 대부분 전남 강진 군에서 열리는 S에서 아버지 T이 하는 일을 도왔으며, 위 할머니 집에서 보낸 시간은 전남 보성군에 엠티를 갔다가 일행과 함께 하룻밤 보낸 것이 전부라고 진술한 점, ② 피해자는 원심 법정에서, 2011년 여름방학 때 안산시에 있는 아버지 H의 집에서 지내다가 여름방학이 끝날 무렵 위 할머니 집으로 내려왔고, 자신이 초등학생일 때 할머니 집에서 피고인이 성기를 자신의 음부에 넣은 적이 있는데 당시 자신이 몇 학년이었는지는 모르겠다고 진술한 점 등에 비추어 보면, 피고인이 위 공소사실과 같이 "2011. 7. - 8.경 피해자를 강간한 사실이 합리적 의심의 여지가 없을 정도로 입증되었다고 보기 어렵다.'는 이유로 무죄를 선고하였다.

3) The judgment of this Court

A) Determination as to paragraphs (A) through (C) of the above facts charged

Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below in light of the records, a thorough examination of the records reveals that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone cannot be seen as having been proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the fact that the defendant committed a crime on the date of each crime specified in each part of the facts charged, and therefore, we accept the judgment of the court below

B) Determination as to paragraph D of the above facts charged

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, the Defendant can be recognized as having raped the victim as described in this part of the facts charged from July 201 to August 8, 201. Therefore, the Prosecutor’s allegation of mistake in the part of the facts charged is with merit.

① With respect to the date and time of the crime in this part of the facts charged, the victim stated that “at the time of high school year, name, o.e., o., o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.s. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.

② At the police investigation, the victim stated to the effect that “the victim was frighten and frighten and frighten in a small three villages. At the same time, the victim was frighten and frighten in a small three villages.” (the second victim’s video tape CD), but frighten and frighten in a small three villages. The victim was frighten and frighten in a prosecutorial investigation. The victim was frighten and frighten in a ward. The victim was frighten and frighten in a ward. There was a frighten and frighten in a low three degree. The victim was frighten and frighten in a three-dimensional village. The victim was frighten and frighten in a three-dimensional village. The victim was frighten and frighten in a three-dimensional village, and the victim was frighten and fright in a two-dimensional trial, and the victim made a statement to the effect that the victim was frighter and fright in a written statement.

③ In particular, a statement in the above statement appears to be difficult to make a statement without experience in the investigation agency. At the investigation agency and the court below, the victim made a voluntary statement that “if the time and place of the charge against Defendant A are not clearly memoryed, it will not be detained.” In particular, it is difficult for the victim to find out the motive of the false statement only in this part of the charge.

④ In the prosecutor’s investigation, the Defendant made a statement that the number of indecent acts and rapes committed on the part of the victim was 2 times, and that it was 2 times to commit rapes, which may be called “the prosecutor’s question of whether an act of memory of the accused is 4 times and no other act may be added” (Evidence Records 429, 430 pages).

⑤ On July 201 to August 8, 201, the Defendant asserted that most of the periods of the Korean Bargn Jin-gun was a father T in S, which is opened in the Gangnam-gun of high school. However, even in the testimony of U witness of the lower court, the festival period from July 2 to August 10, 200, and the Defendant was 20 days from the start of the event, and it is not recognized that the Defendant did not have any victim at the day of the above crime. In addition, the victim was bread, and the father's father's father's father's house was terminated, and the Defendant was bread and her husband's father's house was fried one day, so the testimony of the witness of the lower court, which is the Defendant's money, was difficult to believe in light of the relationship with the Defendant and the circumstances acknowledged earlier.

4) Judgment of the first instance court on the ancillary facts charged

As seen earlier, it is difficult to see that the facts charged are proven with respect to paragraphs (2), (b) and (c) of Item A among the primary facts charged, and as such, it is judged as to each of the ancillary facts charged with this part.

A) On January 2, 2009 to February 2, 2009, the facts of the preliminary charge are as follows: (a) the judgment on the charge of indecent acts by compulsion [related to paragraph (2)] of the above Defendant’s sat home is as follows: (b) around January 2, 2009, the Defendant reported a cartoon book to the floor of the above Defendant’s sat home along with the victim’s sat home (8 years of age and female), and (c) the victim was suffering from the victim’s sat home, with the victim’s sat home, and written the sound book of the victim between 2 to 3 minutes by putting the victim’s sat home into the sat home. Accordingly, the Defendant committed indecent act by compulsion of the victim under 13 years of age.”

The defendant made a confession of this part of the preliminary charges, and the victim also stated in the court of the court below that there was a misunderstanding of the victim's sound with his/her hand. Since the victim's above statement constitutes a supporting evidence of the confession, this part of the preliminary charges are found guilty.

B) On January 2, 2009 to February 2, 2009, the facts charged in the preliminary charge regarding rape (related to rape) was that "the defendant visited the victim in the family of the father of G (8 years of age and female) at Silung-si on January 2, 2009, and when the father of the victim was absent from the victim after the victim's work, then the victim was put in the family of the victim, the defendant was put in the family of the victim after entering the family of 13 years of age after entering the family of the victim. The defendant was able to prevent the victim from getting out of the family of the victim, and then drawn in the family of the victim. Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim under 13 years of age who was related to him."

As to this part of the ancillary facts charged, the Defendant asserts that he attempted to commit rape since he did not saw that he had sexual intercourse into the part of the victim, except for the part of rape. However, the Defendant stated, “I would like to have entered the part of the Defendant’s confessions lawfully adopted at the lower court and the lower court and the evidence duly examined. I would like to read “I would like to have gone through the prosecutor’s investigation. I would like to get her sexual intercourse into the part of the victim, and I would like to go back to the toilet immediately after deduction (435 pages of the evidence record). I would like to say, “I would like to put the Defendant into the part of the ancillary facts charged,” “I would like to put the Defendant into the part of the ancillary facts charged, i.e., the Defendant would have been able to have come into the victim’s body,” and “I would like to put the Defendant into the part of the ancillary facts charged, i.e., the Defendant would have been able to have come into the victim’s body.”

As to this part of the conjunctive facts charged, the Defendant asserts that “the Defendant made a confession, except for the part concerning quasi-rape, while excluding the part concerning quasi-rape, she did not stop the crime and put the Defendant’s sexual organ into the victim’s negative part with the knowledge that she had been able to fright before putting the victim’s sexual organ into the victim’s negative part, and did not put the victim’s sexual organ into the victim’s negative part.” In addition to the victim’s legal statement at the court below, the Defendant’s partial confession, “There is the enemy who was damaged by the father’s father’s house”, this part of the facts charged is guilty, and the Defendant

4. Conclusion

Of the judgment of the court below, the appeal by the defendant B and the prosecutor against the defendant B is without merit, but all the appeals by the defendant B and the prosecutor as to the guilty part among the defendant's defendant's case against the defendant B, and all the appeals by the defendant B and the prosecutor as to the part concerning the claim for attachment order against the defendant B are without merit. Of the judgment of the court below, the part concerning the non-guilty part concerning the defendant B's offense against the defendant B is justified; the prosecutor's appeal is without merit; the remainder except the above part concerning rape is justified; but the prosecutor's appeal is recognized, but the part concerning the attempted quasi-rape is partially guilty in the case of Article 364 (2) and (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. Accordingly, pursuant to Article 364 (2) and (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the guilty part among the defendant's defendant's case against the defendant B is reversed, and the remaining part concerning the non-guilty part concerning the defendant A's offense by force on early August 2009.

Of the judgment of the court below, the appeal by the prosecutor on the part of innocence and the part on the acquittal of the defendant Eul concerning the defendant Eul's indecent act by force on the early August 2009, and the appeal by the defendant B and the prosecutor on the claim for attachment order among the judgment of the court below is dismissed in accordance with Article 35 of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders and Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act

(A) Reasons for the judgment of multiple times: ① The guilty part of the defendant's case against the defendant B and ② the remainder of the crime except the non-guilty part concerning the act of indecent act by force against the defendant A on August 2009

1. Defendant B

The defendant is a person who has kinship with a victim as a third degree of relationship of the victim E.

A. In 2010, the Defendant, at the Defendant’s bar located in F of the Republic of Korea, took the victim’s clothes (nine years of age, female) into the rest of the rest of the rest of the rest of the rest of the rest of the rest of the rest of the rest of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the part of the

Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim under the age of 13.

B. On January 1, 2013 to February 2, 2013, the Defendant: (a) when the father of the victim was present at work at the victim’s home located in G at the early night, the Defendant: (b) led the victim, who was reporting TV, to this part of the body covered by the victim; and (c) sent the chest and the sound part of the victim, and inserted his sexual flag into the part of the victim’s sound.

Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim under the age of 13.

2. Defendant A

The defendant is a person who has kinship with a victim as a third degree of relationship of the victim E.

A. From January 2 to February 2, 2009, the Defendant reported a cartoon book to the floor with the victim (the age of eight and female), along with the instant Defendant’s instant Defendant’s money room, was able to keep the victim’s sound part into the inner clothes, and write about 2 to 3 minutes of the victim’s sound. Accordingly, the Defendant forced the victim under 13 years of age, who was in kinship, to commit an indecent act.

B. Around January 2, 2009 to February 2, 2009, the Defendant visited the victim at his father’s residence located in G (the age of eight, female father), and went to work, and then came to be cut to the victim, the Defendant raised the victim’s pathal ma and her sexual organ into the part of the victim’s sexual organ even though she was able not to get out of the victim, and then inserted the victim’s sexual organ into the part of the victim’s sexual organ. Accordingly, the Defendant raped the victim under 13 years of age who was related to the Defendant. From January 2, 2009 to February 2, 2009, the Defendant attempted to make up the victim’s will and panty in his father’s residence (the age of eight and five) and attempted to put the victim’s sexual organ into the part of the victim’s sexual organ, but attempted to stop the Defendant’s sexual intercourse with the victim’s sexual organ in his own condition.

D. From July 201 to August 8, 201, the Defendant covered the Defendant’s clothes with the Defendant, and then inserted the Defendant’s sexual organ into the victim’s drinking. The Defendant’s sexual organ was inserted into the victim’s drinking.

Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim under the age of 13.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant B

The summary of the evidence of the defendant's case against the defendant B is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

2. Defendant A

1. The trial of the defendant and some of the court below's oral statements;

1. Each legal statement of witness E, H, I, J, K, and L;

1. The second written video CDs made by the police, the video recording CDs made by the victim by the prosecution, and the E contained in the above video recording CDs;

1. Each police statement made to H and I;

1. Family relation certificate, etc.;

1. An expert opinion on sexual assault against children with disabilities;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Defendant B’s crime No. 1-A.: (a) Article 7(1) of the former Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Amended by Act No. 11088, Nov. 17, 201); Article 297 of the former Criminal Act (Amended by Act No. 11574, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply); Article 5(1) of the former Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (wholly amended by Act No. 11556, Dec. 18, 2012); Article 297 of the former Criminal Act (wholly amended by Act No. 11556, Dec. 18, 201); Article 7(1) of the former Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (wholly amended by Act No. 11574, Dec. 15, 2012); Article 297(1) of the former Criminal Act (wholly amended by Act No. 157)

B. Defendant A

○○-2(a) of the Criminal Act: Article 8-2(3) of the former Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims thereof (amended by Act No. 10258, Apr. 15, 2010; hereinafter the same shall apply), Article 298 of the Criminal Act, Article 7(2) of the former Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims thereof, Article 298 of the Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 10259, Apr. 15, 2010); Article 298 of the former Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims thereof (amended by Act No. 10259, Apr. 15, 2010); Article 2-2(b) of the former Criminal Act: Article 8-2(1) of the former Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes; Article 297 of the former Act on the Protection of Victims of Sexual Crimes (amended by Act No. 975, Apr. 19, 2019)

○ criminal facts No. 2-d. of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Amended by Act No. 11088, Nov. 17, 2011); Article 7(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; Article 297 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 11556, Dec. 18, 201); Article 5(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (wholly amended by Act No. 11556, Dec. 18, 201); Article 297 of the former Criminal Act

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Code

(a) Defendant B’s offense of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a minor Rape under thirteen years of age) and violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a crime of rape in relation of relatives, and a crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes with heavy punishment (a

○ Punishment of sexual crimes and Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof (a minor rape, etc. under the age of 13) and punishment on the crimes of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof (a indecent act by force in relation of relatives), and punishment on the crimes of violation of the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection

2) The punishment of a sexual crime and a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims thereof (a minor rape, etc. under the age of 13) and the punishment of a sexual crime and a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection, etc. of Victims thereof (a minor rape, etc. under the age of 13), and an attempt of a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection, etc. of Victims thereof (a minor rape, etc. under the age of 13), and an attempt of a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection, etc. of Victims thereof (a minor rape, etc. under the age of 13), a more severe punishment and an attempt of a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and the Punishment, etc. of Victims thereof (a minor rape, etc. under the age of 13), and a punishment

○ Defendant B

No. 1-b. Selection of a limited term of imprisonment for a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a minor rape under thirteen years of age);

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

○ Defendant B: Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape of Minors under thirteen years of age) under Article 1-1(a) of the same Act, which has a heavier penalty.

○ Defendant A: Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment prescribed in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Minor Rape under thirteen years of age).

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Defendants: Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The conditions favorable to the reasons for sentencing below)

1. Order to complete programs;

Defendants: Article 4 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012); Article 21(2) main text of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

1. An order for disclosure;

A. Article 38(1)1 of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same)

B. Defendant A

A. A.-C. 2 of the judgment of the court below: Article 5(1) of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 9765 of Jun. 9, 2009; hereinafter the same shall apply), Article 37(1)4 of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 9765 of Jun. 9, 2009; hereinafter the same shall apply), Article 49(1)1 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse [However, personal information provided to an order to disclose pursuant to Article 5(7) of the Addenda to the same Act shall be limited to the information provided for perusal pursuant to Article 37(4) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, and in the case of address and actual domicile, it shall be limited

No. 2-D. : Article 38(1)1 of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

1. An order to notify;

0. Defendant B: Article 38-2(1)1 of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (limited to the crimes described in subparagraph 1-b (b) at the time of sale)

○ Defendant A: Article 38-2(1)1 of the former Act on Children and Juveniles (limited to the crimes described in Article 2-2(d) at the time of sale)

Reasons for sentencing

1. Defendant B

(a) The scope of applicable sentences: Imprisonment for a period of five years to twenty years; and

(b) Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for up to six years up to June 13.

(i) Basic crimes: rape in winter on 2010

[Determination of Punishment] Types 5 (Rape) of sex crimes subject to the age of 13

[Special Aggravation] Aggravations: None of the factors to be mitigated

[일반양형인자] 가중요소: 없음 | 감경요소: 형사처벌 전력 없음

[Determination of the Recommendation Area] Reduction Area

[Scope of Recommendation] Minority Crimes from six to nine years: Rape around January 2, 2013

[Determination of Punishment] Types 5 (Rape) of sex crimes subject to the age of 13

[Special Aggravation] Aggravations: None of the factors to be mitigated

[General Aggravations] Aggravations: None / Reductions: No history of criminal punishment;

[Determination of the Recommendation Area] Reduction Area

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of six to nine years

3) Recommendation type revised according to the criteria for handling multiple crimes: Imprisonment with prison labor for 6 years to 13 years (=9 years + 4 years (= 9/2)

(c) Determination of sentence;

The sentence shall be determined as per the Disposition, taking into account the circumstances of finin in the 's judgment ex officio' of No. 2-C.

2. Defendant A

(a) The scope of applicable sentences: Imprisonment for a period of five years to twenty years; and

(b) Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for not less than six years and basic crimes: Rape from July 201 to August 201;

[Determination of Punishment] Types 5 (Rape) of sex crimes subject to the age of 13

[Special Aggravation] Aggravations: None of the factors to be mitigated

[General Aggravations] Aggravations: None / Reductions: No history of criminal punishment;

[Determination of the Recommendation Area] Reduction Area

[Scope of Recommendation] Minor Offenses 1: rape around January 2009 to February 2, 2009

[Determination of Punishment] Types 5 (Rape) of sex crimes subject to the age of 13

[Special Aggravation] Aggravations: None of the factors to be mitigated

[General Aggravations] Aggravations: None / Reductions: No history of criminal punishment;

[Determination of Recommendation] Reduction Area [Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of 6 years to 9 years

3) Concurrent crimes 2: From January 2009 to February 2, 2009, indecent act by compulsion.

[Determination of Punishment] Type 3 (Indecent Act by Compulsion) of a sex offense subject to the age of less than 13

[Special Aggravation] Aggravations: None of the factors to be mitigated

[General Aggravations] Aggravations: None / Reductions: No history of criminal punishment;

[Determination of the Recommendation Area] Reduction Area

[Scope of Recommendation] Imprisonment of two years and six months to five years

4) Concurrent Crimes 3: Attempted quasi-rapes from January 2009 to February 2, 2009; thus, sentencing guidelines do not apply.

5) The lower limit of the recommended sentencing for each of the above crimes whose sentencing guidelines are set according to the criteria for handling multiple crimes and the attempts to commit quasi-rape around January or February 2, 2009, for which no sentencing guidelines have been set, is related to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Therefore, the lower limit of the recommended sentencing guidelines set for each of the above crimes

C. In light of the fact that each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant’s sentencing decisions is an indecent act by force, rape, or attempted rape, and the nature of the crime is very poor, and the victim seems to have very great mental impulses during this process, it is inevitable to punish the Defendant significantly.

However, considering the fact that the defendant has no criminal record at all, that each of the crimes of this case committed by the defendant is committed when the defendant is a juvenile under the age of the defendant, that the defendant is led to confession and reflect on some of the crimes, that the victim expressed his intention not to punish when he was in the trial, and that other factors such as the age, character, character, occupation and environment of the defendant, motive and background leading to the crime of this case, circumstances after the crime, etc. in the records and arguments, the defendant deviate from the lower limit of the sentencing guidelines, and is sentenced to five years of imprisonment, which is the lower limit of the sentencing guidelines, after mitigation of volume.

Where a judgment on the registration of personal information becomes final and conclusive, pursuant to Article 33(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Amended by Act No. 11047, Sep. 15, 201); Article 33(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 201) (wholly amended by Act No. 11572), and Article 33(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 11047, Sep. 15, 201); Defendant A has a duty to submit personal information to a competent agency pursuant to Article 43(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 11047, Sep. 15, 201).

The non-guilty part against Defendant A

1. From among the facts charged in this case against the above defendant under Article 3. 3. b. 1, the part concerning the attempted quasi-rape under Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act is found guilty, inasmuch as the part concerning the attempted quasi-rape under Article 325 (a) (b) and (c) of the Act on the Grounds that there is no proof of a crime on the grounds as examined in the above Article 3.3. 3. b. 1, which is the primary facts charged (A) [2] of the Act on January 2010, 2010 to 20.2 of the Act, and the part concerning the attempted quasi-rape under Article 325 (b) and (b) of the Act on the Grounds that there is no proof of the crime.

2. Of the ancillary facts charged against the above defendant, the part concerning the quasi-rape (C) of the defendant's partial confession from January to February 2, 2009 is acknowledged as attempted quasi-rape and the victim's statement is added to the victim's statement, and it is difficult to deem that the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that the victim's attempted quasi-rape has reached the possibility of quasi-rape. Therefore, the facts charged about the quasi-rape should be acquitted, but as seen earlier, the defendant shall not be acquitted separately in the text.

Judges Gamburh

Judges Invitations