(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.06.12 2014노932 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2014.06.12 2014노932

강간등

Text

Defendant

In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The court below found the defendant guilty of violation of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, among the defendant's case, of violation of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, the court below sentenced the fine of two million won within the scope of aggravated crimes, the imprisonment for rape, four years for the case of violation of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, and the order to attach an electronic device for ten years for the case of the request for attachment order. The defendant appealed only for the part of the defendant's case of the judgment below (the part of the case of the request for attachment order shall be deemed to have appealed) which was sentenced to a fine (the part of the case of the case of the request for attachment order shall be deemed to have appealed) and the part of the case of the court below's appeal is divided and confirmed to be divided into the degree of appeal

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") guilty of the charge of rape, despite the fact that the defendant did not insert his sexual organ at the time of rape and failed to do so in the victim's sexual organ at the time of rape, there was an error of law or of misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The Defendant, at the time of committing the instant crime, is in a state of mental disability and thus ought to be legally mitigated.

C. The sentence imposed by the lower court (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. The Defendant alleged the same purport as the grounds for appeal in the lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal doctrine, and the lower court’s judgment based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court in the “judgment on the Defendant’s assertion” column

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 (창원) 2013.09.26 2013노273

-서울고등법원 2015.11.06 2015노2473

-대전고등법원 2019.11.15 2019노330

-대전고등법원 2013.01.09 2012노406

-서울고등법원 (춘천) 2019.05.01 2018노184