준강간등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
Sexual assault, 80 hours against the defendant.
1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is that the lower court’s punishment (two years and six months of imprisonment, 80 hours of sexual assault treatment program, 3 years of employment restriction order) is too unreasonable.
2. The crime of quasi-rape in this case is a case where a female, who was under the influence of alcohol, has sexual intercourse with the victim by taking advantage of a female’s mental disorder or the state of failing to resist, and thus, the victim seems to have suffered a very large mental impulse.
Meanwhile, even before committing the instant special larceny, even though the Defendant had been subject to criminal punishment several times due to the same larceny, the Defendant committed the instant special larceny during the suspension period of the execution of larceny.
The means of access that the defendant transferred to a person who has lost his/her name was actually used in the crime, and as a result, many victims suffered monetary damage.
All of the crimes of this case were committed during the period of repeated crime and suspended execution.
These points are disadvantageous to the defendant.
On the other hand, the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case and is against the law.
The defendant does not want to punish the defendant by mutual consent between the victim of the crime of quasi-rape and the court below. The victim of special larceny and the victim of special larceny have reached an agreement at the appellate court.
The amount of damage caused by special larceny is relatively small, and the defendant seems to have not obtained monetary benefits in return for transferring the means of access to his/her name.
These points are favorable to the defendant.
As above, considering the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive and means of crime, as well as the above circumstances favorable to the defendant, the sentence imposed by the court below is too unreasonable.
Therefore, the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing is justified.
3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and therefore, Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act is applicable.