성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the sentence of the lower court (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the evidence of confiscation 1, the observation of protection, the attendance order 40 hours, the sexual violence treatment program, the community service work 120 hours) is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. In light of the following facts: (a) there is no particular change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment; and (b) there is no change in the sentencing conditions as to the instant case’s records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment seems to be unfair; and (c) thus, the prosecutor’s aforementioned
B. As to the Defendant’s ex officio determination on the period of the registration of personal information, the period of registration of personal information is 15 years in accordance with Article 45(1)3 and (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (amended by Act No. 14412, Dec. 20, 2016).
Therefore, in light of the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Kameras, etc.) and the crime of intrusion on other buildings in the judgment of the court below, the above period of registration is not recognized as being unfairly long, and therefore the period of registration of personal information against the defendant is not specified as a short-term period.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.