(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.09.22 2016노1717 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.09.22 2016노1717

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(특수강도강간)등

Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable for the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter the Defendant) committed the instant crime again despite the previous convictions of the same kind at several times. The instant crime requires strict punishment against the Defendant, taking into account the following: (a) the Defendant invadeds on the victim D’s residence at night in order to forcibly withdraw the property; (b) forcibly taken property by intrusion on the victim F and H’s residence at night; and (c) forcibly taking property into account the fact that the victim F and H’s rape were rape and the nature of the crime is not good.

However, considering the following factors: (a) the Defendant’s mistake was divided by the Defendant; and (b) the victim H does not want the Defendant’s punishment by mutual consent with the victim H when the Defendant was in the first instance; and (c) the Defendant’s age, sex and environment; (d) motive, means and consequence of the commission of the crime; and (e) the conditions of sentencing specified in the instant pleadings, such as the circumstances after the commission of the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is deemed appropriate; and (e) the Defendant’s and the prosecutor’s above assertion are too heavy and unreasonable. Therefore,

B. The part of the case pertaining to the attachment order is deemed to have filed an appeal regarding the case pertaining to the attachment order under Article 9(8) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and the Electronic Devices Attachment, Etc. (hereinafter “Electronic Devices Attachment Act”). However, the Defendant did not submit a legitimate ground for appeal regarding the attachment order case, and the petition of appeal submitted by the Defendant does not state the grounds for appeal regarding this part, and the record is not examined.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is justified.

참조조문

-전자장치 부착 등에 관한 법률 제9조 제8항

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2017.09.14 2017노1636

-서울고등법원 2017.01.19 2016노3449

-서울고등법원 2016.05.12 2016노14

-광주고등법원 2018.11.29 2018노339

-서울고등법원 2017.12.21 2017노3061