성폭력범죄의처벌및피해자보호등에관한법률위반(특수강도강간등)등
Defendant
In addition, all appeals filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant and the Defendant, who requested an attachment order, explicitly withdrawn the argument of mental and physical weakness on the first trial date.
1) The Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) do not commit the crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims (special robbery, rape, etc.) with the victim E and G, as described in this part of the facts charged.
In the fixed amount of each of the above offenders, the National Institute of Scientific Investigation was found to have the same gene type as the DNA of the defendant (the National Institute of Scientific Investigation was selected in August 2010 as the National Institute of Scientific Investigation.
The results of the DNA testing by the National Institute of Scientific Investigation (hereinafter referred to as the “National Institute of Scientific Investigation”) are not reliable, and even if the results of the DNA testing are accurate, there is a separate truth-finding with the same gene type as the Defendant’s DNA testing.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found all of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2) The punishment sentenced by the court below against the defendant (the crime No. 1 of the judgment: 5 years of imprisonment, the crime No. 1-b of the judgment, and the crime No. 2 and 3 of the judgment: 6 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
3) On September 8, 2017, after the submission period of the written reason for appeal, the written reason for appeal presented by the defendant and the defendant's defendant's three-time trial date on September 20, 2017, each of the statements made by victim E and G with respect to the crime of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims (special robbery, etc.) was committed by the victim E and G, but the criminal committed robbery only after the crime of robbery was committed by force, and thus, the criminal took the property of the above victims by causing robbery. Accordingly, this argument is justified.