beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2018.05.31 2017노8216

강제추행

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In light of the conclusion of the agreement with the victim and the age, etc. of the defendant, it is unreasonable for the court below to impose the defendant a duty to register and submit personal information for a period of 10 years.

2. 1) A person whose judgment has become final and conclusive due to a forced indecent act is a person subject to registration of personal information (Article 42(1) and Article 2(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes); a person subject to registration is obligated to submit his/her personal information to a related agency within 30 days from the date the judgment of conviction becomes final and conclusive (Article 43(1) of the same Act); on the other hand, a person subject to a fine due to a sex crime which causes the registration of personal information shall preserve and manage the registered information for ten years from the date the person subject to registration first registers his/her basic personal information (Article 45(1)4 of the same Act): Provided, That where a sex crime which causes the registration of personal information conflicts with another crime which causes the registration of personal information pursuant to Article 37 of the Criminal Act and a single sentence is pronounced, the court may determine the whole of the sentence to be a type of a sex crime which causes the registration of personal information for a short period of ten years from the date the first registration (Article 45).

2) The Defendant was sentenced to a fine of two million won on the ground of only an indecent act committed by the lower court at the lower court. In the event that the said judgment becomes final and conclusive, the Defendant is obligated to submit his/her basic personal information to the relevant agency pursuant to Articles 42(1) and 43 of the said Act, and the relevant agency shall preserve and manage the said information for ten years, and the same does not apply to cases where the court may reduce the period of preservation and management at will.

3) Therefore, based on the premise that the court can arbitrarily reduce the above period.