beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Part 1 of the case of the Defendant and the respondent for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) were unable to exercise the right to sexual self-determination to the extent that the victim was unable to exercise the right to sexual self-determination due to mental disorder at the time of each of the instant crimes.
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case, which erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles as to “the state of failing to resist due to physical or mental disability” or “using the state of failing to resist,” in the crime of violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.
B) In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court (one hundred and twenty years of imprisonment, one hundred and twenty hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs, and six years of disclosure of information and notification) is too unreasonable. (2) The above sentence imposed by the lower court in light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case by the prosecutor, is too unreasonable and unfair.
B. In light of the content and frequency of each of the crimes of this case committed by a victim who committed an indecent act or sexual intercourse on several occasions for about two years, taking advantage of his/her mental disability that the victim was unable to resist, due to any mental disability, the accused is likely to repeat the sex crime.
Therefore, the defendant's need to attach an electronic device is recognized.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which dismissed the defendant's request for an attachment order, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts as to the risk of recidivism in the attachment order.
2. Determination
A. Part 1 of the defendant's case concerning the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles) The defendant's objection is raised from the court below.