logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전고등법원 2015.09.18 2015노324
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자강간)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

In this Court’s trial scope, the court below sentenced a conviction against the defendant case and sentenced a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request regarding the case for which the attachment order is requested, and the defendant only appealed. As to the case for which the attachment order is requested, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders as there is no interest in appeal, the request for attachment order shall be excluded from the scope of the trial

Judgment on the Grounds for Appeal

A. In light of the circumstances indicated in the record, such as the background leading up to the instant crime, the Defendant’s behavior at the time of committing the instant crime, the circumstances after committing the instant crime, etc., the Defendant did not have the ability to discern things or make decisions due to his personal injury, etc. at the time of committing the instant crime.

in such a manner as to be deemed to have been or weak.

We cannot accept the argument that the defendant was suffering from mental disorder under the influence of alcohol at the time of committing the instant crime.

B. The instant crime claiming unfair sentencing is highly likely to commit the instant crime because the Defendant accessed the victim of the age of 10 who was waiting for her her friend in the morning and prevented the victim from suffering from her head's friend by hand, and led the victim into the building in his friend and attempted to rape.

The victim, as a result of the crime of this case, is faced with a certificate of challenge, etc. by receiving a large amount of mental impulse.

The victim did not recover from damage to the victim at all, and the victim wanted to punish the defendant.

In full view of the circumstances revealed by the record, including these circumstances, the lower court’s statutory mitigation on the ground that the crime was committed with respect to an attempted crime of life imprisonment or imprisonment of not less than 10 years, which is a statutory penalty for the instant crime, was committed.

arrow