성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(주거침입강간등)등
Defendant
In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence of the lower court on the part of the Defendant case is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s order to attach an electronic tracking device is unfair and unfair in that the Defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not pose a risk of recommitting a sexual crime, even though they were not likely to do so.
2. Determination
A. The Defendant’s crime in the part of the Defendant case committed the instant crime is disadvantageous to the Defendant, on October 25, 2012, the following facts: (a) the Defendant, at the latest convenience store near the night, had a female juvenile under the age of 17, checked the location of his/her home and her home, and forced the victim to commit an indecent act by force; (b) the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim who was locked by finding the victim’s home at the victim’s home after the lapse of two months; (c) the crime was committed in light of the time, object, circumstances after the crime was committed; (d) the nature of the crime is very poor and has high social risks; and (e) the victim was deemed to have suffered considerable mental impulse and pain; and (e) the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment for attempted larceny at night on night and on October 25, 2012, and committed the instant crime while again was committed during the repeated crime period.
The circumstances favorable to the defendant include the confession of all of the crimes of this case and the fact that the defendant is seriously against the defendant, the defendant has no record of criminal punishment due to sexual crimes, and the fact that the defendant agreed with the victim are favorable to the defendant.
In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, and the means and consequence of the instant crime, all the circumstances that are conditions for sentencing, such as the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable. Therefore, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.
B. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the attachment order case.