성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (the completion of a sexual assault treatment program for 4 months or 40 hours of imprisonment) is too heavy or it is too heavy (the Defendant).
Judgment
In the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of the discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The instant case does not change any particular conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court, and the circumstances alleged by the Defendant and the prosecutor as unfair reasons for sentencing are likely to have already been reflected in the lower court’s sentencing grounds, and other various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, sex, sex, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime was committed, and criminal records, which are the conditions of the pleadings and the sentencing indicated in the record of the instant case, are comprehensively taken into account, the lower court’s sentencing against the Defendant is too heavy or unhued, thereby exceeding the reasonable scope of the discretion.
It does not seem that it does not appear.
In conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, and all of them are dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition (Article 25(1) of the Rules on Criminal Procedure, since it is obvious that the part of the decision of the court below in the column of the application of the law of the court below is a clerical error in the “the decision of the punishment penalty” is a clerical error in the “the decision of the court below