beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The lower court’s punishment (a fine of 5 million won, and a sexual assault treatment program program 40 hours) against the Defendant on the grounds of appeal (unfair punishment) is too uneased and unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. Considering the fact that the Defendant’s judgment on the Prosecutor’s assertion was the first offender and is against the Defendant’s confession of the crime in the first instance trial, the lower court’s sentencing appears to have been appropriately determined by fully considering the various grounds for sentencing asserted by the Prosecutor, including the motive and mode of the instant crime, the degree of damage, and the progress after the instant crime, and there is no special circumstance to change the sentencing ex post facto, and thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion on the unfair
B. According to Article 2 of the Addenda to the Welfare of Disabled Persons Act (amended by Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018; Act No. 15904, Jun. 12, 2019), Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Disabled Persons (amended by Act No. 15904, Jun. 12, 2019) applies to a person who has committed a sex offense before the enforcement of the Act, and has not received a final and conclusive judgment.
In light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s age, the risk of recidivism, family environment, social relationship, the details and motive of the crime, the method and consequence of the crime; (b) the degree and expected side effects of the Defendant’s disadvantage due to the employment restriction order; (c) the prevention and effect of the sex offense that may be achieved therefrom; and (d) the effect of the protection of victims, etc., there are special circumstances where the employment restriction order for welfare facilities for the disabled should not be imposed; (b) the lower court did not issue an employment restriction order for welfare facilities for the disabled pursuant to the proviso of
3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.