성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자강제추행)등
Defendant
In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. 1) In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment, and 80 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs, information disclosure, and notification three years) is too unreasonable. 2) In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case by the prosecutor, the above sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.
B. In light of the content of the instant crime committed by indecent act by force against female students under the age of 8 as a teacher teaching after-school golf at an elementary school, the Defendant’s need to attach an electronic device is recognized.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which dismissed the defendant's request for an attachment order, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts as to the risk of recidivism in the attachment order.
2. Determination
A. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the part of the defendant case, the crime of this case committed an indecent act by the defendant by inserting his hand to the victim, who is the elementary school student, in the middle of golfing. In light of the place of the crime, the degree of indecent act, the victim's personal trust relationship with the victim, etc., the crime is very poor and highly likely to be subject to criticism, as well as the mental suffering suffered from the crime of this case as the victim is memory and reported even though one year has passed since the case was 1 year after the case, and even if the memory of this case was not easily erased, there are many circumstances unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that there is a concern that the victim's growth and development could have an adverse impact on the victim's growth and development because the memory of this case was not easily erased, the defendant attempted to distort itself in the fact-finding process and to manipulate evidence.
On the other hand, however, the defendant's mistake is late.