아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(유사성행위)등
Defendant
In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.
1. The lower court rendered a judgment ex officio to order the protection and observation when dismissing the prosecutor’s request with respect to the part of the case of the Defendant and the part of the case for which the attachment order was requested.
On the other hand, the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") appealed on the ground that the sentencing of the defendant's case was unfair.
Notwithstanding Article 9 (8) of the Act on the Attachment, etc. of Electronic Devices (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on the Attachment of Electronic Devices"), the part on which the judgment of the court below requests an attachment order shall be excluded from the scope of the trial of this court as there is no benefit in appeal
Therefore, the scope of this Court's adjudication is limited to the part of the case of the judgment below and to the part of the ex officio order of observation of protection deemed to have lodged an appeal under Articles 9 (8) and 21-8 of the Electronic Devices Installation Act.
2. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (such as imprisonment with prison labor for four years) is unreasonable.
3. Determination
A. The lower court, on the part of the Defendant’s case, took into account the following factors: (a) the fact that the instant crime committed by the Defendant, who had induced the victim who is a child or juvenile with a intellectual disability to commit an indecent act for the purpose of committing an indecent act, and committed the actual similarity, is not good in light of the course and method; (b) the fact relevance of the Defendant is recognized; (c) the Defendant submitted a written application not to punish the victim in consultation with the victim; and (d) the Defendant did not have any past record of having been punished for a sexual crime or of having been sentenced to heavier punishment than the suspended execution; and (d) determined the Defendant’s punishment by comprehensively taking into account various sentencing conditions, such as the Defendant’s age, environment, motive and background, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances
In the court below, the defendant has a disability and has low intelligence, and the defendant has agreed with the victim, etc., the punishment is determined.