beta
(영문) 서울동부지방법원 2014.10.02 2014노832 (1)

폭력행위등처벌에관한법률위반(집단ㆍ흉기등재물손괴등)등

Text

The judgment of the court below (excluding the compensation order and the part concerning the cost of lawsuit) shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the event of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental or physical disability.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The crime of indecent act by compulsion constitutes a sex offense subject to registration under Article 42(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, which constitutes a sex offense subject to an order to disclose and notify the personal information under Articles 47 and 49 of the same Act, and thus is subject to an order to disclose and notify the personal information. The court below erred by omitting judgment on the order to disclose and notify the personal information of the defendant while finding the defendant guilty.

(2) In addition, Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes provides that “where a court declares a guilty verdict (excluding postponement of a sentence) on a person who has committed a sexual crime, the court shall concurrently issue an order to attend a lecture or order to complete a sexual assault treatment program for a period of up to 500 hours: Provided, That the same shall not apply to special circumstances where an order to attend a lecture or order to complete a program is not possible,” and the crime of indecent act by compulsion constitutes a sexual crime under Article 2(1)3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes. The court below erred by failing to concurrently issue an order to attend a lecture or order to complete a program

(3) However, in this case where only the defendant appealed despite the above mistake by the court below, such mistake by the court below does not affect the conclusion of the judgment of this court in accordance with the principle of prohibition of disadvantageous change under Article 368 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 2012Do1029 Decided April 26, 2012 and Supreme Court Decision 2012Do8736 Decided September 27, 2012