성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(주거침입강간)등
The judgment below
The guilty portion shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.
except that from the date of this judgment.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) As to the violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Offense of misunderstanding the fact and misunderstanding the legal doctrine), the Defendant would enter the victim through windows.
Since the victim was in mind, it does not constitute an intrusion on residence.
The defendant did not have the intention to force the victim to refuse the sexual intercourse, so there was no intention to rape.
B) As to the detention of the victim, the detention does not constitute an confinement, on the ground that the victim was on the part of the victim’s house up to the J restaurant on the part of the victim’s house.
C) As to the charge of quasi-rape, the Defendant does not constitute quasi-rape since there is no marbling of the victim’s sexual organ into the victim.
From October 2016 to November 201, 2016, the defendant and the victim brought about sexual intercourse inside the victim's dan in the operation of the victim, and the defendant's genes was detected in sofacs.
2) The sentence of the lower court (two years of imprisonment) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.
B. The lower court’s sentence against the prosecutor (unlawful in sentencing) is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, 1) recognition of the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes”) (1) the victim was investigated by the police on April 13, 2017 by a witness, and thereafter stated to the same effect as the prosecution and the lower court.
On July 25, 2008, the defendant, who was a guest, came to know that he was a guest.
From around 2009, the Defendant began to meet with her, repeated the laba, and the laba laba took full lab around October 2016.
D. The Defendant, on October 1, 2016 or around November 2016, 2016, has a Hague against the Defendant.
The contact was made.
Of January 2017, a sound exceeded the toilet side when he was coming to know about 1 to 2 clicker from the house, and he himself.