logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.03.23 2016노1640
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)
Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. On the summary of the reasons for appeal, the defendant asserts that the punishment imposed by the court below is too unfasible, and that the prosecutor is too unfasible and unfair.

2. The sentence imposed by the lower court is the highest penalty of a fine among statutory penalty.

The crime of this case is not likely to cause a sense of sexual shame to be provided to others against the victim's will, and the crime of this case is not good.

In addition, if the pictures are distributed, there is a risk that much big damage will occur.

On the other hand, there is no criminal history against the defendant.

The crime of this case was committed by providing a specific person with a photograph, and the photograph was distributed to an unspecified person.

There is no circumstance to consider.

Although the Defendant denied the instant crime by asserting that it was not based on the lower court’s reasoning, the Defendant was seriously opposed to the lower court’s mistake.

In addition, in full view of various conditions of sentencing as shown in the records and arguments, such as the defendant's age, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below is too heavy or unbrupted within the reasonable scope of discretion, and thus, it cannot be deemed unfair.

3. According to the conclusion, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in entirety in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since it is not reasonable.

However, since it is apparent that the term "reasons for sentencing" of the judgment below is followed, it is clear that the following is added ex officio in accordance with Article 25(1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, and the court does not separately impose the duty to submit personal information of a person subject to registration. Thus, the notice of duty to submit personal information by the court which declares the conviction is meaningful to inform the person subject to registration that the person subject to registration is free to submit personal information.

Therefore, even if the court declares a conviction, it is required to submit the notification or notification.

arrow