성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인강간)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant
A Imprisonment with prison labor for six years and for three years and six months, respectively.
Defendant .
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence of imprisonment (eight years of imprisonment) imposed by the lower court against the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order to A (hereinafter “Defendant A”) is too unreasonable.
B. Of the facts charged in the instant case of mistake of facts, the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested, B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) committed sexual intercourse by taking advantage of the fact that the victim G with intellectual disability was potential to resist on June 2012, 2012, when around 03:30, the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested, and the victim B (hereinafter “Defendant B”), among the facts charged in the instant case of mistake of facts, committed sexual intercourse by taking advantage of the fact that the victim G was potential to resist (Article 2-A of the facts charged in the judgment of the lower court). The judgment convicting the Defendant of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes
B. The court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the application of the law, since the defendant's act in the above paragraph (1) constitutes the crime of quasi-rape against the disabled person, the crime of quasi-rape under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes is established when the victim's sexual intercourse with the victim who has been unable to resist due to mental or physical disability. The victim G is engaged in ordinary social activities such as working in laundry, etc., and the victim's sexual intercourse with the victim's intellectual disability level is not due to intellectual disability but due to "the reason why the victim did not resist against the defendant's sexual intercourse."
Secondly, the court below's sentence of unfair sentencing (four years of imprisonment) against Defendant B is too unreasonable.
2. Determination on the part of the defendant's case
A. Defendant B-.