성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인준강간)
Defendant
In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for the attachment order, the requester for the protective order, and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. The statement in the defense counsel’s written opinion on March 20, 2018, which was submitted after March 20, 2018, is not timely filed, shall be considered to the extent that it supplements the grounds for appeal.
A. Part 1 of the case of the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order, the person who requested the attachment order, and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter "the defendant") to whom the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order ("the defendant") to whom the order to observe the order to observe the order to protect the victim was sent back to the victim's back to the victim at the time, and the victim's her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her part.
There was no criminal intent to rape the victim and there was no criminal intent to rape.
B) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (five years of imprisonment, 40 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.
2) The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.
B. It is unreasonable to not issue an order to attach an electronic tracking device to a defendant when seen in light of the details of the instant crime and the criminal records of the defendant, etc.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant alleged to the effect that the lower court also argued to the same effect as above, and the lower court, in light of the following circumstances, etc., deemed that the Defendant attempted rape beyond forcing the victim who is the disabled to commit an indecent act.
The above argument was rejected in the judgment.
① The victim made a statement at an investigative agency to the effect that he was “the Defendant was herb and her clothes,” and the prosecution made a statement to the effect that he was “I am her her knick with the Defendant’s finger and sexual intercourse.”
② At a place less than 1m away from the time of the instant crime, F, in the investigative agency and the court of original instance, observed the Defendant’s clothes and kneees, making the victim knee and knee in one hand.