성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자강제추행)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is the short time for the defendant to reach the victim, and the victim did not remarkably displeasure the first crime.
Considering the fact that the statement was made by the defendant, that the defendant was dead after the crime was committed, that the defendant did not have access to the victim if the victim refuses, that defendant did not have access to the crime, that the defendant recognized the crime and resisted the wrong crime, that there was no risk of recidivism, and that the defendant's environment, family relationship, relationship with the victim's mother, etc. (a punishment imposed by the court below (a punishment of imprisonment with prison labor for a period of five years, a period of 80 hours) is too unreasonable.
2. The lower court, on the grounds of appeal, rendered a sentence identical to the disposition, comprehensively taking into account the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant, favorable to the Defendant, and the scope of the recommended sentence according to the sentencing guidelines.
The defendant committed an indecent act on two occasions against a victim who has not reached 11 years of age with interest on her husband and woman, and the case is very significant and is not suitable for committing a crime.
Due to these acts of the defendant, the victim seems to have suffered a great mental impulse and sexual humiliation which cannot be said to be achieved, and will not obstruct the right character formation and growth in the future.
is concerned.
B. The sentencing elements against the defendant are also the factors that are disadvantageous to the defendant, such as the fact that there is no particular circumstance that the defendant has endeavored to recover damage, and that the victim wants to punish the defendant strictly.
In addition, the favorable circumstances asserted by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal were already considered in the sentencing of the lower court, and there is no change in the sentencing conditions in comparison with the lower court because new sentencing materials have not been submitted in the trial of the lower court.
In light of these various circumstances, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit, since the lower court’s punishment is not recognized to be unfair due to its gross negligence.
3. Thus, the defendant's appeal is without merit.