성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)
The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.
The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.
except that this judgment.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable. 2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s grounds for appeal, according to the statement under subparagraph 1 (mental appraisal statement) submitted by the trial court ex officio, prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant, there is sufficient room to regard the Defendant as having been in a state of lacking ability to discern things or make decisions due to the physical illness, such as sexual disorder, etc. at the time of each of the instant offenses, and the judgment of the first instance court, which determined the sentence against the Defendant, cannot be maintained, even though this constitutes the grounds for the necessary mitigation of punishment.
3. According to the conclusion, the judgment of the first instance court is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the above ex officio grounds for reversal of unfair sentencing, and the judgment of the first instance court is reversed by adding special matters to the defendant under Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act,
The criminal facts and the summary of the evidence recognized by the court are the same as the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Article 13(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes under the pertinent Act and the Selection of Punishment, etc. of the Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Optional to Imprisonment with prison labor), 1. Article 10(2) and (1), and Article 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act, which is legally mitigated for concurrent crimes (person with mental disability). Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution on January 1, 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act provides that even though the defendant has a history of criminal punishment on several occasions for concurrent crimes similar to this case, the defendant again committed each of the instant crimes. However, even though the defendant had a history of criminal punishment on several occasions, it is hard to say that the defendant would not repeat the same mistake in depth and again through the life remaining for six months.