Judgment

If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment in the appellate court, and the sentencing of the original court is not beyond the scope of reasonable discretion, it is reasonable to respect

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). As to the Defendant, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the lower court in the trial.

At the time of committing the instant crime, the Defendant was a minor under 18 years of age, and currently has exceeded 20 years of age on the side, and there is no particular criminal history other than that subject to juvenile protective disposition in the past.

Defendant

The parents have expressed their intent to make their best to guide the defendant and assist him in returning to society.

Above all, the court below expressed the intention that the victim does not want the punishment by mutual consent with I (tentative name) who is rape victim at the stage of the court below.

Such circumstances must be considered in light of the circumstances favorable to the defendant.

However, the Defendant: (a) threatened the victim E (tentative) who became aware of the Internet broadcast to spread a photograph of exposure found in the SNS account by demanding a sexual relation to the victim B; (b) threatened the victim E (tentative) who did not prejudice the sexual relation; (c) threatened the victim and the victim to bullying; (d) threatened the victim by finding out the exposed photograph from the victim I in the victim’s home to send the exposed photograph to the victim; and (e) made the victim open a door to the victim’s house; and (e) by threatening the victim to visit the victim’s house; and (e) by inducing the victim’s parents to take a specific body part of the smartphone and transmit it to the police station, the Defendant produced the child and juvenile pornography.