logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.01.08 2014노3103
강간미수
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below which did not recognize the fact that the defendant was guilty at the time of the crime of this case, but did not recognize it.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant also asserted the same purport in the lower court’s judgment as above, and the lower court rejected the above assertion.

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is recognized that the defendant committed the crime of this case under the influence of drinking.

However, in light of the background and method leading to the instant crime, the horses and behaviors of the Defendant before and after the instant crime, etc., it does not seem that the Defendant had the weak ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking at the time of the instant crime.

In addition, Article 20 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes provides that "where a sexual crime (excluding a crime under Article 2 (1) 1 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes) is committed in the state of mental or physical disorder caused by drinking or drug, Article 10 (1) and (2) and Article 11 of the Criminal Act may not apply to the crime of this case."

Therefore, even if the defendant was drunk at the time of committing the instant crime and was in a state of mental disorder, the punishment against the defendant does not necessarily have to be mitigated in accordance with Article 10(2) of the Criminal Act.

Therefore, the above argument of the defendant is without merit.

B. The Defendant’s judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing is a favorable circumstance to the Defendant, for example, the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime, and that the instant crime was committed in attempted crimes, and that the Defendant did not have any criminal record, etc.

On the other hand, this is true.

arrow