정보통신망이용촉진및정보보호등에관한법률위반(음란물유포)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for a term of one year, two years of suspended execution, one hundred and twenty hours of community service, and forty hours of lecture) of the lower court is deemed to be too uneasible and unfair;
2. Determination
A. The Defendant is a previous criminal record who received a summary order in 2008 on the assertion of unfair sentencing.
The Defendant, who was drunkly under the influence of alcohol, taken a photograph of the victim’s chest, sound, etc., and sent the victim’s chests, sound, etc. in custody to the Internet pornography site by putting them in custody. In light of the above photographs, the degree of exposure, etc. is very serious to cause sexual humiliation. On the other hand, the Defendant did not have any way to recover the damage to the victim, as long as the pictures were distributed via the Internet and become in a situation where many and unspecified persons could see it.
However, while recognizing the crime of this case, the Defendant appears to have a strong reflective nature by submitting a statement of reflective nature several times, and is under the mental and medical treatment.
A defendant shall not have the power to criminal punishment, in addition to the above summary order.
If the defendant's seized photographs, it does not seem that the identity of the victim is easy or clear.
In full view of the circumstances, including the above circumstances, the Defendant’s age, career, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive and background of the crime, means and consequence of the crime, etc., and the fact that there are no special circumstances or changes in circumstances that may change the sentencing after the judgment of the court below, the sentencing of the court below does not seem to have exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too unfeasible to the sentencing of the court below.
The prosecutor's assertion is without merit.
B. In this case, ex officio determination on an employment restriction order under the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018) is based on Article 2 of the Addenda to the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities and Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities.