성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인강간)등
The guilty part of the judgment of the court below and the attachment order case shall be reversed in entirety.
Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The prosecutor (not guilty part against E) E (hereinafter referred to as “victim E”) consistently stated to the effect that the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) first on the day of the instant case constituted forced rape against the will of the person on the rooftop against the latter.
Nevertheless, the court below rejected the credibility statement without any reasonable ground, and acquitted the Defendant of the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Persons with Disabilities) and the violation of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles from Sexual Abuse against Children (hereinafter “component charges of rape in relation to speech”) among the facts charged in the instant case, and acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the legal doctrine or misunderstanding of facts (guilty part against the victim G) committed a visit to the house as the beginning of the speech, but the Defendant was at home 30 minutes of the wind and the wind of the victim G (hereinafter “victim”). When opening a door door with the victim, there was no contact other than that of the victim, and there was no fact of having sexual intercourse with the victim by force.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the victim of the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes against the Victims (e.g., deceptive means, etc. between the disabled persons) and the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children’s Juveniles from Sexual Abuse (hereinafter “compact charge between abuse of force against the victim”) by using a summary of the case without admissibility as evidence, K’s testimony and a written statement of the victim as evidence, etc., is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or by
2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (six years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
3) The judgment of the court below ordering the attachment of an electronic device for a period of 20 years, even though the risk of recidivism by the defendant who was improper to attach an electronic device is not high.
2. Determination
A. Defendant case.