성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자강제추행)
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing, and the sentencing of the lower court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it shall be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no particular change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment on the ground that there was no submission of new materials of sentencing in the instant case
In addition, in full view of the sentencing conditions shown in the records and arguments of the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant was excessively unhutiled and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
shall not be deemed to exist.
The prosecutor’s assertion disputing the propriety of sentencing of the court below is not accepted.
2. In full view of various circumstances, such as the Defendant’s age, social relation, criminal record (the absence of the record of a sexual crime) and risk of recidivism, the circumstances leading to the instant crime and the details of the instant crime, the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s entry due to the instant disclosure and notification order, and the comparative balancing between the expected effects of a sexual crime and the expected profits, there are special circumstances in which the Defendant’s personal information may not be disclosed or notified.
The crime of this case is not subject to notification order pursuant to the proviso of Article 1 and Article 4 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Act No. 10260 of April 15, 2010), and therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is justifiable.
We cannot accept the prosecutor's argument disputing this.
3. The appeal by the conclusion prosecutor is dismissed for reasons.