성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable for the lower court’s punishment (a prison term of 10 months, 2 years of suspended sentence, 240 hours of community service, 40 hours of lecture attendance order for sexual assault treatment, 40 hours of confiscation).
2. Determination
A. It is recognized that the Defendant confessions the instant crime and reflects the Defendant, the Defendant’s primary offender, and the thief was returned to the victim.
B. However, the defendant taken a secret photograph of the body of the victims who may cause a considerable sense of sexual shame, as well as intrusion on public toilets which are public places for this purpose. In particular, the defendant committed the crime in the case of the 2016 High Order 1190, which is being investigated by the police as the case of the 2016 High Order 2016 High Order 2016 High Order 2105, which is being investigated by the police, and committed the crime in the case of the 2016 High Order 2016 High Order 2016, which is not agreed with the victims, and did not take any measures to protect the victims, and there is no special change of circumstances after the decision of the court below was made, and all other circumstances favorable to the defendant in the argument in the instant case, even if considering the above circumstances favorable to the defendant, it shall not be determined that the sentence of the court below is unfair because it is too excessive.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.