beta
(영문) 울산지방법원 2017.09.22 2017노782

특정범죄자에대한보호관찰및전자장치부착등에관한법률위반등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

In the case of paragraph 1(a) of the judgment of the defendant, it is about the crime No. 1 and No. 2 of the daily list of crimes in attached Form 1(a).

Reasons

1. The sentence of the lower court against the Defendant on the summary of the grounds of appeal (for the crimes set forth in [Attachment No. 1] No. 1-A of the facts constituting the crime set forth in the lower judgment, four months of imprisonment, four years of imprisonment for the remaining crimes, and confiscation) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of violation of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Electronic Devices, etc. of the Specific Criminal Offenders in this case committed a violation of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders in this case was committed by the observation officer to arrange a hospital for the purpose of the alcohol treatment of the defendant and to request the supply of and demand for basic living at the hospital. However, the use of the electronic device repeatedly damages the effectiveness of the electronic device while getting out of the hospital by getting out of the hospital, getting out of the hospital, and doing so, obscing and verbal abuse to the protection observation officer, and intentionally failing to comply with the direction, and the nature of the crime is very poor. The crime of destruction and intimidation of the property in this case is also against the victim's property without any particular reason, and the victim wants to punish the defendant. The victim is also subject to a repeated crime, even in the process of the investigation in this case, and doing violent language to the investigator, and doing so, and it is also disadvantageous to the defendant during the specific period of crime committed by the victim in this case.

However, each of the crimes in this case appears to have no direct connection with the risk of recidivism of sexual crimes, which is a fact giving rise to the attachment order of electronic device against the defendant, and some of the crimes must take into account the equity between the case and the case where the judgment is rendered simultaneously with the final and conclusive judgment entered in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, and the crime of destruction of property and special intimidation in this case is deemed to have been committed