성폭력범죄의처벌및피해자보호등에관한법률위반(특수강간)등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for seven years and a fine of one million won.
The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (five years of imprisonment and fine of one million won) is too unreasonable.
2. The lower court, ex officio, ordered the Defendant to complete sexual assault treatment programs for 80 hours by applying Article 13(1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse.
However, Article 13 of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 10260, Apr. 15, 2010) that applies to the crime of attempted special rape committed against juveniles as stated in the judgment below provides for the enforcement of an order to attend a lecture only on the premise that a suspended sentence is imposed on a person who committed a sex offense against a child or juvenile, and the compulsory imposition of an order to attend a lecture or order to complete a sexual assault treatment program is required in all cases where a conviction is pronounced against a person who committed a sex offense against a child or juvenile. The system was first introduced by the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse as amended by Act No. 10260, Apr. 15, 2010. According to Articles 1 and 2 of the Addenda of the same Act on the enforcement date of the order to attend a lecture or order to complete a sexual assault treatment program.
In the case of this case, it is evident that the sexual crime date of the defendant committed the crime on March 15, 2008 and May 20, 2008, which is the crime before the concurrent implementation of the order to receive a lecture at the time of conviction under the above amended Act, it is a crime before the concurrent implementation of the order to receive a lecture at the time of conviction under the former Act
Therefore, although the above revised Act does not apply to the defendant, the court below ordered the defendant to complete sexual assault treatment programs while sentenced to a seven-year imprisonment, which affected the judgment of the court below.
Since the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.
3. Accordingly, the court below's decision is erroneous.