성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of the grounds of appeal - The sentence (5 million won in penalty, 40 hours in order to complete a sexual assault treatment program) pronounced by the court below against the defendant which was unfair in sentencing is unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. It is not reasonable to respond to the prosecutor’s assertion that the Defendant had to severely punish the instant crime even though the said judgment became final and conclusive on one year of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Special Act on the Refund of Monetary Loss Caused by Telecommunications Finance, and the said judgment became final and conclusive, despite the period of suspension of execution.
B. However, there is room for the Defendant to be punished by a fine, in consideration of various circumstances favorable to the Defendant, such as the fact that the Defendant was not a criminal record before the suspended sentence of the Defendant, that the Defendant’s crime of this case was acknowledged at the latest and against the truth, that the victim did not want to be punished by the Defendant, that the Defendant was making efforts to prevent recidivism, such as the Defendant’s completion of sex-related prevention education, and that the Defendant should live with an influenite disorder that the Defendant did not cause an influent traffic accident.
Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment was too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal of this case is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.