beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.03.26 2015노568

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자강간)등

Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an electronic tracking device (hereinafter “Defendant”) (hereinafter “Defendant”) are inappropriate in that the lower court’s sentence (three years and six months of imprisonment) imposed on the Defendant is too unreasonable. 2) It is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device, even though the Defendant in the attachment order case does not have the risk of recidivism or recidivism of sexual crimes.

B. The prosecutor (unfair form of punishment)’s sentence imposed by the court below against the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant of the instant case reflects his mistake by recognizing the instant crime.

The legal representative of the victims does not want to punish the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is extremely poor since the defendant's father and wife in a de facto marital relationship and two victims under the age of 13 were attempted to commit indecent act by force or rape on three occasions, and the crime of this case is extremely poor.

For this reason, victims who have not yet been mature mentally and physically had a big mental impact.

Defendant has been punished for the same kind of crime.

In addition, comprehensively taking account of the age, character and conduct, environment, etc. of the defendant and the sentencing guidelines established by the Sentencing Committee, it cannot be deemed that the sentence imposed by the court below is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument are without merit.

B. In full view of the circumstances in its reasoning based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the lower court determined that the Defendant committed a sexual crime and thereby was likely to recommit the recidivism of the sexual crime and the sexual crime.

In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and its attachment period is also appropriate.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion.