성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment or imprisonment with prison labor for not more than two years, probation, or an order to attend a sexual assault treatment lecture for not more than 40 hours, confiscation) imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.
2. There is no change in circumstances after the decision of the court below was pronounced.
Even after the crime of this case was committed, the Defendant continued to contact the victim until March 2018, and the victim, who received a significant mental impulse, wanted to be punished by the Defendant up to the trial.
Considering the above circumstances, the lower court’s punishment is too heavy.
Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
3. According to Article 2 of the Addenda to the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities ( December 11, 2018), Article 59-3 of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, effective as of June 12, 2019, applies to a person who has committed a sex offense before the said Act enters into force and has not been finally determined.
The crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes falls under a sex offense to which the above provision applies, and thus, this court must decide on whether to issue an employment restriction order or to exempt the defendant from the employment restriction order.
In light of the Defendant’s age, criminal record, family environment, social relationship, details and motive of the crime, method of crime, and consequence, the degree and expected side effect of the Defendant’s disadvantage due to the employment restriction order, prevention and effect of the sex crime that can be achieved therefrom, victim protection effect, possibility of recidivism, etc., the lower court’s judgment that did not issue an employment restriction order to the Defendant for welfare facilities for the disabled pursuant to the proviso to Article 59-3(1) of the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act should be maintained as it is, in its entirety.
4. The defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the conclusion is groundless.