성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자위계등간음)등
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Since the lower judgment that found the Defendant guilty of all the facts charged in the instant case and dismissed the prosecutor’s request for attachment order, the part of the lower judgment regarding the claim for attachment order among the judgment below is excluded from the scope of the trial for each party, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Devices, as there is no benefit in appeal.
2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is unreasonable in light of the following: (a) the Defendant committed most crimes while under the influence of alcohol, and most of his family members’ livelihood is difficult due to the Defendant’s detention; and (b) the Defendant’s health is not good due to an unreshion; (c) the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.
3. In a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court, considering favorable circumstances, such as the Defendant’s confession as the primary offender, etc., taking into account the circumstance favorable to the Defendant, while the nature of the crime is not good in light of the period and method of the crime, and the fact that physical and mental damage suffered by the victim is serious, and the Defendant was punished against the Defendant on the part of the victim.
In addition to the above circumstances, there is no new circumstance to change the sentence of the court below in the trial, and considering all the sentencing conditions under Article 51 of the Criminal Act as shown in the proceedings of the court below and the party deliberation, even if the circumstances alleged by the defendant on the grounds of appeal are fully considered, it is recognized that the sentence imposed by the court below is within the reasonable scope of discretion and it is too unreasonable.