logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2016.06.23 2016노144
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(강간등치상)등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is as follows: (a) although the Defendant was drunk at the time of committing the crime resulting from rape, etc. of this case, he did not commit the same crime as indicated in the facts charged; (b) the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged on the wind that the Defendant relied only on the fabricated evidence or the victim’s unilateral statement.

(A) At the time of each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental and physical loss or mental weakness, such as being drunk and having no memory at all.

(Unfair of Sentencing) The sentence of the lower court (a punishment of 6 years, order to complete a sexual assault treatment program for 80 hours, and order to disclose and notify personal information for 5 years) is too unreasonable.

2. Examining the evidence and records duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s determination that found the Defendant guilty of the injury resulting from rape, etc. of this case is justifiable, and thus, rejected the above assertion by the Defendant.

In light of the Defendant’s main volume, the background of the crime, the means and method of the crime, the circumstances, etc. indicated in the argument and the record of the instant case, the Defendant did not have the ability to move things due to drinking at the time of each of the instant crimes, and do not have or lacks the ability to make decisions.

The decision is judged.

In full view of the facts constituting the conditions for the sentencing and the sentencing guidelines expressed in the sentencing review process of the lower court, the lower court’s judgment that deemed the primary sentencing factor, including the nature and circumstance of each of the instant crimes, victims’ pain and damage recovery, whether the Defendant’s reflectivity, etc., exceeded the reasonable bounds of its discretion.

It can not be assessed, and there is no circumstance or material that can be deemed unfair to maintain the sentencing of the court below in the course of the deliberation of the sentencing of the party.

3. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed (Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act).

arrow