logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2012.11.09 2012노2568
성폭력범죄의처벌및피해자보호등에관한법률위반(특수강간)
Text

All appeals by the Defendants and the Prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court found the Defendants guilty of violating the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims (Special Rape) among the facts charged in the instant case, and dismissed the prosecution against Defendant C on the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse.

Therefore, the part of the prosecution against Defendant C among the facts charged in this case is separate and finalized, and the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the guilty part of the judgment of the court below.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Defendants (1) misunderstanding of facts (Defendant A and B) have asserted for mistake of facts with the same purport as other Defendants in the statement of grounds of appeal, but on the second trial, they withdrawn the assertion of mistake of facts while recognizing the crime of this case.

Defendant

A and B do not have a sexual relationship with the victim itself.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the Defendants) is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor (as to the Defendant)’s sentence is too unhued and unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. Defendant A and B also asserted the same purport as the reasons for appeal in the original judgment, and the lower court rejected the above Defendants’ assertion in detail by stating in the written judgment the Defendant’s assertion and its decision in detail under the title of the Act on the Determination of the Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion. In light of the judgment of the lower court compared with the records, the judgment is justified, and it cannot be said that there was an error of law affecting the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding facts, and therefore, this part of the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

B. The instant crime against the Defendants and the Prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing is a case in which the Defendants had the victims under the age of 13, who were merely the said age, drunk and leaptable.

arrow