성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(강간등상해)
The judgment of the first instance is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for ten years.
For a period of 10 years, the information on the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) The injury suffered by a misunderstanding of facts is not an opportunity for rape, but is generated in the course of physical fighting with the victim and E before sexual intercourses with the Defendant. Nevertheless, the first instance court erred by misapprehending the fact that the injury was caused by the opportunity for rape and that the crime of injury resulting from rape was found guilty. 2) The punishment sentenced by the first instance court of unfair sentencing (six years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.
B. Although the instant crime by misapprehending the legal doctrine constitutes a repeated crime under Article 3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Specific Crimes, the first instance court was punished as a repeated crime under Article 35 of the Criminal Act. The first instance court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on repeated crimes. 2) The sentence imposed by the first instance court of unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unfair.
2. Determination
A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor ex officio, the prosecutor changed the applicable provisions of the facts charged in this case to "Article 35 of the Criminal Act", and the object of the trial by this court was changed to "Article 3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Specific Crimes". As such, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the accused case is no longer maintained, and where the part concerning the accused case is reversed, the part concerning the case concerning the case for which the judgment should be issued at the same time after examination together with the above cannot be reversed.
However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, even though there is a ground for the above ex officio reversal.
B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, and ① the victim lying the Defendant on his own Daz and himself, and “hyp”
One is the same as the other is, or the latter is the latter.