beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.03.27 2013노3741

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인강간)등

Text

The judgment below

The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

80 hours per the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment (seven years of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court against the Defendant and the person who requested to attach an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) is too unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable for the court below to dismiss the request for the attachment order of this case even though the prosecutor's defendant's risk of recidivism is recognized.

(A) The prosecutor appealed from the defendant's case on the grounds of unfair sentencing, but the prosecutor withdraws his argument on unfair sentencing on the second trial date, and thus does not make a separate decision thereon). 2.

A. The crime of this case on the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing is not a good nature, since the victim of the second-class mental retardation, who lost his house and she was on board the Defendant’s taxi, and sexual intercourse with the victim by inducing the victim to the telecom.

However, it seems that the court below's comprehensive sentencing seems unfair if the oral proceedings of this case are too unfair, such as sex crime, general criteria, sex crime, sex crime against the disabled (age 13 or more), type 4 (Rape), mitigation area (special mitigation factors), mitigation area (special mitigation factors; special mitigation factors), concurrent crimes - Type 1 (age 4 or 6) in the judgment of the court below, category 2 (in the case of abduction inducement), basic area (special aggravation factors; special mitigation factors; special mitigation factors; if the victim is mentally disabled person); age, character and conduct, family relation, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc. of the defendant; circumstances after the crime of this case are shown in the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is justified.

B. The lower court’s judgment on the Prosecutor’s assertion on the case of attachment order.