성폭력범죄의처벌및피해자보호등에관한법률위반(특수강도강간등)등
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The prosecutor’s sentencing of the lower court (12 years of imprisonment) and the attachment order period (10 years of imprisonment) are too minor or less so unfair.
B. The sentencing of the lower court on the (i) the Defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) is too unreasonable.
she was under the influence of the victim at the time of the instant crime against the victim, and the victim was in a state of mental disability.
Then, it is unreasonable that the court below ordered the defendant to attach an electronic device.
x) The order of the court below to disclose and notify personal information is unreasonable.
2. Determination on the part of the case of the defendant
A. In light of the background leading up to the Defendant’s crime, the means and method of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, the frequency of the crime, and the period between each crime, etc., it is not deemed that the Defendant had the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the above crime.
B. In light of the fact that the Defendant was sentenced to five years of imprisonment for a crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims, etc. (Special Robbery, Rape, etc.), which is a same crime, and for whom two years have not passed since the execution of the sentence, the Defendant committed each of the crimes of this case more than ten years since her left to commit each of the crimes of this case. The victims of each of the crimes of this case seems to have considerable property or mental damage, and the Defendant appears to have prepared each of the crimes of this case closely in advance, the prosecutor’s assertion that the Defendant needs more severe punishment is reasonable.
However, the sentencing of the court below is based on the fact that the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, divided his mistake, deposited a certain amount for the recovery of victims' damage, and all other conditions of sentencing against the defendant.