logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.09.26 2019노1654
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(강간등치상)등
Text

The judgment below

The remainder except for the part for which the attachment order is requested shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a maximum term.

Reasons

1. The court below sentenced the defendant to a conviction for a prosecuted case, dismissed the prosecutor's request regarding a request for attachment order, and sentenced the defendant to probation ex officio pursuant to Article 21-3 (2) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders (hereinafter "Electronic Monitoring Act"), and only the defendant appealed.

Therefore, according to Articles 9(8) and 21-8 of the Electronic Monitoring Act, the scope of the trial of this court, notwithstanding the part concerning the defendant's case and the part concerning the ex officio probation order, if the defendant files an appeal against the part concerning the defendant's case among the judgment below, the part concerning the request for attachment order or the part concerning the request for probation order, shall be deemed as filing an appeal. The part concerning the probation order issued by the court ex officio in accordance with Article 21-3(2) of the Electronic Monitoring Act, shall be deemed as identical to this. Therefore, the part concerning the probation order issued by the court in accordance with Article 21-3(2) of the Electronic Monitoring Act shall be deemed as filing an appeal against the defendant.

limited to this section.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the crime under paragraph (2) of the judgment of the court below, such as misunderstanding of facts, etc. [the victim F (a person aged 11, 11; hereinafter referred to as the "victim of a dispute] cannot be deemed to constitute "injury" as provided for in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape, etc.).

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the charges guilty. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to "injury" as provided in the mistake of facts or the above crime.

arrow