성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 2’s sentence (3 million won, orders to complete sexual assault treatment programs, confiscation, etc.) of the lower court is unfair because it is too unreasonable (i.e., the Defendant stated in the initial petition of appeal that misunderstanding of facts was also alleged in the grounds of appeal, but the reasons for appeal did not state any mistake in facts, and the Defendant stated that misunderstanding was not alleged on the grounds of appeal at the first trial date of the first trial of the first instance court). B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is unreasonable because it is too uneasible.
2. We examine both the Defendant and prosecutor’s unfair argument of sentencing at once.
Despite the fact that the defendant was sentenced to the previous juvenile protective disposition due to the crime of injury resulting from forced indecent conduct, two years and six months of imprisonment, the crime of injury resulting from robbery, and the crime of coercion by force, the defendant again committed the crime of taking two women's spawn, and the fact that he did not agree with the victims, and that the victims were forced to punish the defendants, is disadvantageous to the defendant.
On the other hand, the fact that the defendant submitted a large number of rebuttals to the investigative agency, the court below and the court of the trial, and the court of the trial, and later repents his mistake, the photograph of the crime of this case seems not to have been leaked, and the defendant's opening and tenting in the future are favorable to the defendant, in order to prevent him from being exposed to his son who was born on September 13, 2016.
In addition to the above circumstances, comprehensively taking account of the Defendant’s age, sex, occupation, and environment, the background leading to the instant crime, and the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable as it is difficult to view that the lower court’s punishment is too heavy.
Therefore, we cannot accept the argument that the sentencing of the defendant and the prosecutor is unfair.
3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor are all filed.