준강제추행
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal in this case is a case where the defendant who was off his body was under influence of alcohol, committed an indecent act by sparing the body of the victim who was under influence of alcohol, and the defendant did not go to a more serious crime if he was not under restraint from his relative. In light of the content and degree of indecent act, etc., the nature of the crime is not less than that of the crime. Nevertheless, the defendant did not fully lead to the crime while explaining that he was a crime under the state of mental and physical disorder under the influence of alcohol at the court below. Considering that it cannot be seen that the outline is obvious, the punishment of the court below [the suspension of sentence (three million won of a fine)] is too uneasy and unfair.
2. The current Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the principle of court-oriented trials and the principle of direct determination, has a unique area of the first instance court as to the determination of sentencing, so it is reasonable to respect the determination of sentencing in a case where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court and the first instance court’s sentencing does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion (see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). The lower court suspended the sentence of a fine against the Defendant on the grounds of the circumstances indicated in its reasoning. The grounds for the unfavorable sentencing asserted by the prosecutor are deemed to have been sufficiently taken into account when determining the sentence in the lower court, and there is no addition of new sentencing materials that could change the sentence of the lower court in the trial court at the first instance court, as well as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., are considered equally.
3. Judgment ex officio on the employment restriction order under the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act;
A. In the instant case, Article 2 of the Addenda to the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act (Law No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018) is applicable.