logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.09.14 2017노1744
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자강제추행)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable on the grounds of appeal.

2. It is recognized that the Defendant committed the instant crime in the state of mental and physical weakness due to cerebral disease, etc., and that the Defendant agreed with the victim E when she was in the first instance.

However, the defendant committed the crime of this case again during the period of the suspension of execution, even though he had the same criminal record, by committing an indecent act against the victim C, etc. at a place where the defendant is concentrated with the public, by committing an indecent act against the victim E under the age of 13, by coercion, etc., and by committing an indecent act against the victim C, etc., the defendant did not agree with the victim C, etc. up to the trial. The statutory punishment for the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act by a minor under the age of 13) is imprisonment for more than five years, or a fine of more than 30,000 won, but not more than 50,000 won. The court below selected the imprisonment for a limited term, selected the imprisonment for a limited term, sentenced to imprisonment for more than one year and three months, and sentenced to a limited amount of imprisonment for more than one year and three months, and the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and result of the crime, etc.

3. As such, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed under Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed. However, following the second 3 conduct of the judgment of the court below, it is evident that “the Defendant has lacks the ability to discern things or make decisions due to cerebral disease, etc.,” and thus, the judgment of the court below is added pursuant to

arrow