2012Gohap61 Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Retaliatory Crimes, etc.)

Kim, Kim Kim-young

Seoul Mao-gu / Dong / Dong;

In the case of the current prison prison prison prison number:

[Reference domicile-si]

MaManman (prosecutions) and Manman (public trial)

Attorney Gangwon-ho (National Election)

July 19, 2012

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Facts of crime

On April 4, 2011, the Defendant was sentenced by the Suwon District Court to 13 years of imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (special robbery, Rape, etc.) against the victim's lectures (the age of 33) and present

A prison is under execution of its punishment in the course of execution.

When both appeals and appeals against the above case were dismissed, the defendant appealed to the above case, but the victim did not give testimony favorable to himself, and on December 26, 201, at the school of the Do on the ground that he testified in the above case, the defendant's testimony was made on December 26, 201, "It is necessary to confirm what kind of injury is being inflicted on the victim's body, and what kind of robbery is, because he returned to the body inside the country and the rape was made into the crime of robbery, and what kind of robbery is, and what kind of robbery is, it is difficult to confirm how much he was injured on the knife's conscience and the knife of 1 South and North 1st knife's conscience. The defendant made a knife and knife in the body of his family." The defendant made a testimony in relation to the criminal case against the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Testimony to a witness;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the defendant's prosecution;

1. Each letter;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of related decisions);

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 5-9 (2) and (1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, and Article 283 (1) of the Criminal Act

2. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following consideration shall be given to favorable circumstances among the reasons for sentencing):

Judgment on the Defendant’s and defense counsel’s argument

The defendant and defense counsel acknowledged the fact that they sent a letter such as the statement in the decision of the defendant (hereinafter referred to as "the letter in this case") to the victim, but they asserted that there was no purpose of retaliation.

In light of the above evidence, the following facts are acknowledged.

1. (1) On September 15, 2010, the Defendant: (a) requested the victim, who is engaged in the real estate brokerage business, to introduce a house to the victim; and (b) tried to commit rape after cutting off the clothes by threatening the victim; (c) but the victim resisted the part of the defendant's sagn part of the defendant's sagn part of the defendant's sagn part of the defendant's sagn part of the sagn part of the sagn part of the sagn part of the defendant's sagn part of the sagn part of the sagn part of the sagn part of the sagn part of the saf

② In a criminal trial for the above crimes, the Defendant had no intent to rape the victim, and denied that he/she would bring about a vehicle with the consent of the victim.

③ Accordingly, the victim testified that he was summoned as a witness in the above criminal trial, and that at the time of the crime, the Defendant stated that he was “a person who was forced to salivate” and that he was fine even though the victim complained of it at the time.

④ In recognition of the credibility, etc. of the victim’s testimony as above, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for 13 years at the first instance court on April 4, 2011 (No. 2010 High Court 201Da585). The Defendant’s appeal (Seoul High Court 201Do1120) was dismissed on August 26, 201, and the Defendant’s appeal (Supreme Court 201Do1289) was dismissed on November 10, 201.

⑤ The Defendant sent two letters to the victim during the trial of the first and second instances. The contents of the Defendant’s request for a letter were mostly the contents of the Defendant’s request. However, the instant letter sent after the Defendant’s judgment on the criminal case became final and conclusive include the content that the Defendant would return the letter to the victim more than that of the victim’s injury, and the contents of the letter that did not appear in the above criminal facts are as follows.

B. The house of a width seems to be infinite and infinite, so that he can not live together.

In this place, we shall not see in a life-long, all of which are lived by all lives and lives of pins.

I would like to see the future. (b) In this respect, I would like to see the eye and solitary solitary solitarys in this eye, we should live a life.

I would like to see.

In full view of the circumstances leading up to sending the instant letter to the victim, the details of the instant letter containing a threat of harm and injury called retaliation, etc., it is reasonable to conclude that the Defendant sent the instant letter to the victim for the purpose of retaliation and seeking the victim’s testimony. Accordingly, the Defendant and the defense counsel against this issue are not acceptable.

Reasons for sentencing

The nature of the crime of this case, which was committed by the defendant, did not reflect in depth on the crime of this case committed by the defendant, or rather did not seem to have a conspiracy to commit the crime of deceiving the victim, but rather sent the victim the letter of this case, which was frightened by body and mind due to the defendant's special robbery and rape, and contains the contents of retaliation. The crime of this case, which caused the crime of this case, is not less complicated, and the degree of the possibility of criticism against the defendant is reasonable considering the mental situation where the

However, in light of the favorable circumstances to the victim, such as the fact that the defendant was sentenced to a 13-year imprisonment with prison labor and the defendant appears to have reached the crime of this case, and that there seems to be some parts to be considered in the motive, and that the expression of intimidation stated in the letter of this case is relatively minor, etc., the statutory punishment of this case shall be mitigated and the same sentence as the order shall be determined.

Kim Jong-il (Presiding Judge)

Beneficiary

Park Byung-Jin Park