logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 (춘천) 2020.02.05 2019노176
미성년자의제강간등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court rendered a judgment of conviction on the part of the Defendant case and rendered a judgment of dismissing the prosecutor’s request regarding the part regarding which the request for attachment order was filed, and only the Defendant appealed.

Therefore, under Article 9 (8) of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, the defendant is deemed to have lodged an appeal against a judgment on the case of a request for attachment order, but there is no benefit of appeal against the part of the request for attachment order.

Thus, the scope of this court's trial shall be limited to the part of the defendant's case, and the part of the case of attachment order shall be excluded from the scope of the

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., 15 years of imprisonment) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

3. The judgment appears to have an attitude against this court when the defendant made a confession of all of the crimes of this case from the investigative agency, and the fact that there is no past record of criminal punishment is favorable.

However, each of the crimes of this case is an anti-human crime committed by a person who has continuously sexual intercourse or rape from the time when the victim was at 12 years of age to meet his distorted sexual desire by which the defendant is unable to protect the victim who is her father or mother, and the crime of this case is extremely bad.

The defendant's crime of this case shows that the victim suffered from mental and physical impulses and pain that are difficult to measure, and this seems to be difficult to recover through life, and it seems difficult to form sexual identity and values in the future.

The defendant was unable to receive a letter from the victim.

The above point is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition to the above circumstances against the defendant, there is no special change in circumstances that the court should change the punishment differently.

arrow