준강간치상
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.
information about the defendant for three years.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The lower court convicted the Defendant of the charge of quasi-rape, despite the fact that the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim. However, the victim did not have a state of failing to resist under the influence of alcohol, and thus did not constitute a crime of injury resulting from quasi-rape.
B. The lower court’s sentencing is too excessive and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Article 16(2) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (amended and promulgated by Act No. 10258, Apr. 15, 2010; hereinafter “former Act on Special Cases”) provides that where a court suspends the execution of a sentence against a sex offender, it may order probation or order community service or attending a lecture for a certain period within the period of probation, or order probation only within the period of probation.”
However, Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes”) amended by Act No. 10567 of April 7, 201 provides that “where a court declares a conviction (excluding postponement of a sentence), it may concurrently order a person who has committed a sexual crime to attend a lecture or to complete a sexual assault treatment program for a period not exceeding 300 hours,” and Paragraph (1) of the Addenda provides that “this Act shall enter into force six months after its promulgation,” and Paragraph (2) provides that “The amended provisions of Article 16 shall apply to a person who has committed a sexual crime first after this Act enters into force, from the person who has committed a sexual crime.” As such, the court may concurrently order an order to attend a lecture where only a person who has committed a sexual crime is sentenced after October 8, 2011.
With respect to this case, it is before Article 16(2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Amendment is enforced.