성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(주거침입강간등)등
The appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor on the part of the judgment of the first instance against the defendant is dismissed.
The judgment of the court of first instance is in the judgment.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant and the respondent for an order to attach an electronic device 1) The first instance judgment of unfair sentencing is limited to Defendant and the respondent for an order to attach an electronic device (hereinafter “Defendant” and “Defendant”).
(ii) it is unreasonable that the first instance court, which was unjustly ordered to attach a location tracking electronic device to the accused, is improper to order the accused to attach an electronic device.
B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence imposed on the Defendant by the first instance court of unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.2) The period of attachment of an electronic tracking device (10 years) ordered by the first instance court of unfair judgment during the period of attachment order is too short and unfair.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant is recognized as a favorable sentencing factor, such as the confession of his own crime and the fact that he is against his own will, the agreement with some victims, the two children and wife who should support, and the social relationship is relatively clear.
On the other hand, even though the Defendant had been sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on September 29, 200 to four years for rape in the Jinwon District Court's Jinju branch, the Defendant committed rape against an unspecified female female by habitually intrusioning another's residence five times from 2007 to 2012. In particular, it is recognized that the victim K was a minor at the time of the crime, the victim H was a minor, and the victim H was charged with the lower part of the lower part of the lower part of the lower part at the time of the crime, and the degree of the injury suffered by the victim M was not easy, and that there was a very poor risk and quality of the relevant several laws, and the rest of the crime was not used by the victim.
In full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive and background leading to the instant crime, the means and consequence of the instant crime, and other circumstances revealed in pleadings, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the first instance court is deemed appropriate, and it cannot be deemed that it is too heavy or unreasonable.
Therefore, it is true.