아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(위계등간음)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six years.
Sexual assault against the defendant for 80 hours.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
(a) There is no fact that the defendant has sexual intercourse or commits an indecent act by force with regard to the crime in violation of the Act on the Prevention of Child and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse and the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;
B. A mentally ill-minded person was under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing each crime of obstruction of performance of official duties 2014 high-priced89, 2014 high-priced92 violence, obstruction of duties, and obstruction of performance of official duties.
C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment and 80 hours’ order for sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The defendant argued that the above assertion of mistake of facts is identical to the above assertion of mistake of facts, and the court below rejected the above assertion in detail by giving a detailed statement on the judgment. In light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the judgment of the court below is legitimate, and the defendant and the defense counsel's assertion of
B. According to the record of determination on the claim of mental disability, the defendant may be found to have committed each crime of obstruction of performance of official duties, 2014 high-priced 89, 2014 high-priced 92, 2012, obstruction of business, and obstruction of performance of official duties under the influence of alcohol. However, in light of the circumstances and methods leading up to each of the above crimes, the statement and behavior of the defendant before and after the crime, etc., it is deemed that the defendant lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking, and thus, the defendant and the defense counsel
C. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant had a record of having been punished several times due to violent crimes or obstruction of performance of official duties, etc., and the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes during the period of suspended execution after having been sentenced to a suspended sentence due to quasi-Robbery, etc.
However, there is no record that the defendant has been punished for a sexual crime.