beta
Text
The judgment below
The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.
(b) the defendant;
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant and the person for whom the attachment order was requested (the factual error) and the person for whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not recognize that the victim was a minor under the age of 13 at the time of sexual intercourse with the victim.
Nevertheless, the court below found guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. Prosecutor 1) The Defendant case (i) committed by the lower court against the Defendant (i.e., imprisonment with prison labor for a period of one year and six months, and forty hours) was too uneased and unreasonable. 2) The Defendant had been punished for committing an indecent act against a child or juvenile on several occasions even before the request for attachment order was made. The instant crime also constitutes sexual intercourse with a minor victim under the age of 13, and thus, the Defendant is sufficiently recognized in light of the background of the crime, method and means of the crime, and form of the act, etc., and thus, the risk of recommitting a crime due to the recidivism of a sexual crime is sufficiently recognized.
In addition, the evaluation of recidivism risk against the defendant constitutes "highness".
Nevertheless, the lower court’s dismissal of the request for the attachment order of this case is unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts in part 1 of the Defendant’s case, the Defendant also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part.
The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the ground that the Defendant appears to have known the fact that the Defendant was under 13 years of age, considering the following circumstances as indicated in its reasoning based on the adopted evidence, in part 4, 10, 10, 10, 10, and 10.
Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below in light of the records, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no illegality that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.