beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.01.09 2013노1783

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인강제추행)등

Text

Of the judgment of the first instance, the part of the defendant case and the second judgment shall be reversed.

The first crime is committed against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. 1 of the first instance judgment) 1 of the Defendant case - The lower court and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”).

In light of the fact that the sentence imposed on the Defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment, 40 hours of completion of a sexual assault treatment program, and 5 years of disclosure of personal information) is unfairly heavy. 2) The lower court’s order ordering an attachment order to be issued is unreasonable in light of the fact that the Defendant does not pose a risk of re-offending in the part of the case claiming the attachment

B. The punishment of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment, 40 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs, and 5 years of disclosure of personal information) declared by the lower court against the Defendant is unfairly harsh.

2. Determination

A. In light of the part concerning the defendant's case of the first judgment and the part concerning the defendant's case of the second judgment of the second judgment of the second judgment, the defendant forced the victim with intellectual disability to commit an indecent act by inducing him/her at his/her own house. The defendant's intelligence index is merely an average level of 81, and thus is subject to his/her sexual satisfaction. Thus, the defendant's act of causing bodily harm on September 23, 201 without being aware of the fact that he/she committed any of the crimes in the same kind of crime without being aware of the fact that he/she was sentenced to 4 years of suspended execution on September 23, 201 and was sentenced to 4 years of suspended execution on September 23, 201, and the victim did not reach an agreement with the victim. However, considering the fact that the defendant's intelligence index is merely an average level of below, the part concerning the defendant's disclosure of personal information among the sentence of the second judgment of the second judgment of the court below is justified.