강제추행등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The judgment of the court below that dismissed the request for an attachment order on the ground that it is unfair for the defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") to commit a sexual crime, because it is recognized that the punishment of the court below is too unfilled and unfair.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim by raising his/her hand on the shoulder of the victim first deemed to have been salved prior to the night, and attaching his/her hand.
The crime of this case is one of the crimes committed in light of the relationship between the defendant and the victim, the details and the method of the crime, etc.
The victim seems to have suffered considerable mental impulse due to the crime of this case.
Although there are many criminal convictions against the defendant, he has been sentenced to imprisonment for a long time but one year for the crime of indecent act by force on November 22, 1990, sentenced to six years for the crime of rape and bodily injury on December 29, 1993, and sentenced to two years for the crime of indecent act by force on June 22, 2001.
The Defendant was unable to take advantage of the victim, and did not recover from the victim’s damage.
However, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). Examining the following circumstances in full view of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions and applicable sentences as indicated in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime was committed, and the scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing guidelines for the enactment of the Sentencing Committee, the sentence of the lower court is not deemed to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion, or to be too unjustifiable.
Therefore, the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.
B. On June 201, 2001, the defendant applied for an attachment order.