협박등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment for one year, 100 hours to complete a sexual assault treatment program, 3 years to be restricted on employment, and Confiscation) of the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the judgment of the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect them. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is desirable to reverse the judgment of the first instance court on the sole ground that it is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court, and to refrain from imposing a sentence that does not differ
(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The following are the circumstances favorable to the Defendant: (a) the Defendant recognizes and reflects his/her mistake; (b) the primary offender is the primary offender; and (c) the health is not good.
On the other hand, in light of the background and method of the crime, contents, age of the victim, etc., the crime of the defendant was very poor, the victim was faced with the mental impulse that is difficult to recover easily due to the crime of the defendant, the victim and his parents did not receive a letter from the victim and their parents, and it is difficult to expect it in the future, and the crime of anti-humanism like this in this case is also not affected by our society, and thus, it is disadvantageous to the defendant.
Therefore, the court below determined the punishment within a reasonable scope by fully taking into account all the circumstances regarding the sentencing of the defendant, and there is no circumstance that can be newly considered in the trial.
In addition, comprehensively taking account of the various circumstances, such as the motive and means of the crime and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below cannot be deemed to be so excessive that the sentencing of the court below goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit. It is so ordered as per Disposition.