logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.09.24 2015노1991
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자위계등간음)
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six years.

Sexual assault, 80 hours against the defendant.

Reasons

1. The court below rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request with respect to the case of the attachment order claim while rendering a judgment of conviction against the defendant, and the defendant appealed only against this, and thus, there is no benefit of appeal with respect to the case of the attachment order claim.

Therefore, notwithstanding Article 9 (8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. for Specific Criminal Offenders, the part of the judgment below regarding the request for attachment order among the judgment below is excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court, and only the part of the defendant's case constitutes the scope

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (along-year imprisonment) by the lower court (along-year imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. The crime of this case is deemed to have committed sexual intercourse or similar act by the defendant under the age of 13 by force four times, and in light of the content of the crime, the crime is very serious in light of the crime, and the victim has suffered physical and mental shock and pain. This is deemed to have a negative effect on the victim in the future to form a sound sexual identity and values. Thus, it is inevitable to punish the defendant with severe penalty corresponding thereto.

However, under the state that the defendant's ability to become aware is somewhat short of the age of 18 or 19 at the time of committing the crime, it appears that the defendant did not properly look back of his house and caused sexual impulse with the victim to commit the crime of this case without any sexual impulse. The defendant recognized all the crimes within the investigative agency and divided the errors. The defendant did not have any history of criminal punishment, and the victim expressed his intention that the victim's father does not want to be punished, and the victim also wanted the defendant's wife in the trial.

arrow