강제추행치상
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment, five years of suspended execution, etc.) on the gist of the grounds of appeal is deemed to be too uneasy and unfair.
2. The Defendant committed the instant crime: (a) committed the instant crime by taking a victim’s chest, etc., who resisted against the victim’s body, following a victim, who did not have any flag at night; and (b) committed an indecent act by force; and (c) the nature of the crime was not good; (d) the victim appears to have suffered considerable physical and mental pain and suffered sexual humiliation; and (e) the victim was sufficiently recovered from the victim’s damage.
It can not be seen, and the fact that the victim is still trying to punish the defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant.
On the other hand, the fact that the defendant is fully aware of his own crime and is against depth, the injury suffered by the victim is not serious, the defendant is the first offender who has no record of crime, and the defendant seems to have endeavored to recover from damage by depositing the prescribed amount for the victim, and the defendant has a family member to support the defendant, and the defendant's wife appeals against the defendant's wife, etc. are favorable to the defendant.
On the other hand, if there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In full view of other circumstances that are the conditions of sentencing, such as the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, relationship with the victim, motive or circumstance of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is not difficult to deem that the sentence imposed by the lower court exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too uneasible to the punishment imposed by the lower court.
Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.