beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment on the unfair argument of sentencing, and the sentencing of the lower court is not beyond the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect such a case (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the lower court’s judgment on the ground that the new materials of sentencing were not submitted
In addition, the crime of this case committed by the defendant and the requester for the attachment order (hereinafter "defendant") committed an indecent act against the guests in an uncompeting situation at the inside of the criminal defendant's working place, and committed the crime of this case by stealing money in an uncompeting crisis where the crime was discovered, and thus, the crime of this case was committed; the defendant committed the crime of this case even though he had been sentenced to six years of sexual assault crime in the past, and the victim E was deemed to have suffered considerable mental shock, but the damage was not recovered, and the victims wanted to punish the defendant, and the sentencing conditions specified in the records and arguments are considered as favorable to the defendant, even if all of the various sentencing factors are considered, it cannot be said that the punishment of the court below is excessively excessive and goes beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.
The defendant's assertion that the sentencing of the court below is unreasonable is not accepted.
2. On October 25, 2001, the lower court determined as to the claim for attachment order: (i) the Defendant, at the Gwangju District Court, committed sexual intercourse with the victim’s resistance while taking advantage of dangerous articles at the victim’s house on August 1, 2001, and forcibly taking advantage of the victim’s property, and had been raped once after suppressing the victim’s resistance.
“A” has committed the instant crime even though he/she had been sentenced to six years of imprisonment for committing a crime of special robbery or rape, and two sexual crimes committed by the Defendant are all committed.