성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인준강간)
All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A’s imprisonment (seven years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant B and the Prosecutor asserted that Defendant B’s punishment (two years and six months of imprisonment) of the lower court is too unreasonable, and the Prosecutor asserts that it is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. It is favorable for Defendant A to have no criminal record of the same kind, and to recognize the crime, etc. in determining the unfair sentencing of Defendant A.
On the other hand, the crime of this case is a situation unfavorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant has sexual intercourse over four occasions by taking advantage of the fact that it is substantially difficult for the victim to exercise his right to sexual self-determination due to intellectual disability, and the nature of the crime is bad, the victim and his family members have suffered considerable mental suffering due to the crime of this case, the damage recovery has not been made, and the victim
In addition to these circumstances, considering the fact that the sentence imposed by the court below is the lowest of statutory punishment, the fact that there is no special change of circumstances that may vary in the punishment from the court below to the court below, and other various factors of sentencing as shown in the proceedings of pleadings in this case, such as the Defendant’s age, health, character and conduct, family relation, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the sentence of the court below is too unreasonable.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is without merit.
B. The instant crime on the assertion of unfair sentencing by Defendant B and the prosecutor is an indecent act committed by the victim on two occasions by taking advantage of the fact that the victim is significantly difficult to exercise his right to sexual self-determination due to intellectual disability, and the nature of the crime is bad, the victim and his family members have suffered considerable mental suffering due to the instant crime, the victim did not recover from damage, and the victim still wishes to punish the defendant.