성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(주거침입강간등)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.
Sexual assault, 40 hours against the defendant.
1. As to the gist of the reasons for appeal (two years and six months of imprisonment), the prosecutor asserts that the prosecutor too unhueded, and the defendant and the person against whom the attachment order is requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") are too unreasonable.
2. The judgment of the court below is no longer maintained, since the court requested an attachment order to the defendant for the first time before the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, and the prosecutor decided to consolidate the defendant's case and the case for which the attachment order is requested.
3. Thus, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant and the prosecutor's assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal as seen above, and it is again decided as follows.
Criminal facts
The facts of the cause of the request for attachment order [criminal facts] The criminal facts against the defendant are as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and such facts are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
[In the case of a request for an attachment order on September 19, 2003, the person subject to the request for the attachment order has the same record of force in addition to imprisonment for two years and six months, and imprisonment for a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims, etc. (residential Rape, Rape, etc.).
On May 11, 2013, at around 10:00, the person subject to an application for an attachment order: (a) discovered the victim D (hereinafter referred to as “the age of 19”) who walk ahead of the convenience store in the Jeonju-gun, Jeonju-gun; (b) opened a gate where correction is not made; and (c) opened the victim D’s house at around 04:00 on May 12, 2013 where the victim refused and continued to walk, but the victim confirmed the victim’s house; and (d) opened the victim D’s house at around 04:0 on May 12, 2013 where the victim D was found to be found in E, and entered as the ma, and opened the e-mail and opened the e-mail which is not corrected.
The defendant runs a locked at his place.