logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원고등법원 2020.06.10 2020노160
특수협박등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. With respect to special intimidation among the facts charged in this case of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s act constitutes a crime of intimidation in light of the following facts: (a) the Defendant’s statement at the prosecution of the victim that she caused the relevant father by stating that “I will die; (b) the Defendant actually committed murder; and (c) the Defendant was guilty of attempted murder; and (d) the Defendant saw the victim as a deadly weapon even before and after the death of the victim; and (b) the Defendant clearly stated that there was fear of fear of fear to the Defendant who continuously suspect himself and used violence while living together, the Defendant’s act constitutes a crime of intimidation.

Nevertheless, the lower court deemed that the Defendant’s act was merely anger or sexual harassment, and rendered a not-guilty verdict on this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment, 80 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs, and 5 years of employment restrictions on welfare facilities for children and juveniles, institutions related to children and juveniles, and 5 years of welfare facilities for the disabled) is too

C. It is unreasonable for the lower court to exempt the Defendant from disclosure and notification order, even though there is a need for disclosure and notification of the Defendant’s registered information to prevent additional damage, since the Defendant had violent sexual values.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, on the assertion of mistake of facts, states in detail the various circumstances recognized by the records of the instant case under Article 2. 2. of the judgment of the lower court, and in light of such circumstances, the Defendant’s statement, etc. at the time was not a threat of harm and injury inflicted on the victim, but rather, tried to harm the victim at the time and made the victim with his/her death.

arrow