아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강간)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.
However, for a period of four years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The decision of the court below on the summary of the grounds for appeal (the imprisonment of three years and forty hours and the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.
2. The crime of this case in determining the grounds for appeal is a case in which the defendant has sexual intercourse with the victim against the will of the victim who is merely 17 years of age at the time, and the liability for such crime is not minor.
The ageer victim caused mental pain and sexual humiliation due to the criminal act of the defendant, and the family members of the victim seems to have suffered a lot of shocks.
Moreover, the Defendant did not receive a letter from the victim.
On the other hand, on the other hand, the defendant has not yet been able to determine whether he is a juvenile under the age of 18 and has yet to establish the values of sex.
In particular, at around 03:00 of the new wall on the day of the instant case, the Defendant divided the conversation with the Defendant’s dormitory, and attempted to make sexual contacts with the victim while the victim was locked by being locked from the Defendant’s one-person beds (the first floor of the second floor bed) in the same beds with the victim, such as the victim and the victim, and his body was pushed off. While the victim refused to do so, the Defendant did not actively inform the victim of the same or avoid the place of the conversation.
The Defendant continued such an attempt, and the victim got sexual intercourse with the victim who remains in her place without mentioning the victim of his/her sexual intercourse at the time of the invasion.
Although it is clear that such act of the defendant was wrong, there are some circumstances to consider the age of the defendant and the situation at the time of the case.
In addition, there was no direct price act or intimidation at the time of sexual intercourse with the victim, and after sexual intercourse, the defendant was aware of pregnancy, at the request of the victim at the time of sexual intercourse.