beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
The judgment below
The information about the defendant in the disposition shall be disclosed for five years.
Reasons
The grounds for appeal (unfair punishment) sentenced by the court below (five years of imprisonment, etc.) are too unreasonable.
Judgment
If there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the original judgment in the appellate court, and the sentencing of the original court is not beyond the scope of reasonable discretion, it is reasonable to respect
(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, there is no significant change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment in the first instance.
The fact that there is no past record of criminal punishment against the defendant, and that the defendant generally recognized the crime and shows an attitude to repent of the mistake, etc. are favorable to the defendant.
However, each of the crimes of this case is sexual intercourse or indecent act after inducing young victims who had experience in working as a female hosting model by having access to smartphone hosting type, and the crime of this case was committed in light of the contents, objects, means and methods of crime, etc. of crime, the victimized children and juveniles have suffered serious mental impulse and pain due to the crime of this case, and are likely to have suffered negative impacts on the formation of value of personality and sex, and thus, they did not take measures for recovery of damage, and even if considering the sentencing conditions favorable to the defendant in light of the records and arguments of this case, it cannot be said that the court below's punishment of the defendant was excessively excessive and exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.
Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is difficult to accept.
The defendant's appeal is dismissed on the ground that it is without merit.
However, the court below ordered the disclosure and notification of the information on the accused for five years, and does not specify the sex offense subject to it in the text of the judgment.