Defendant

The highest leap (prosecution), and the leaps (public trial)

Law Firm Hyan, Attorney Min Il- Jae, Counsel for defendant

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for eight years.

To the person subject to the request for attachment order, the attachment of an electronic tracking device shall be ordered for ten years.

Matters to be observed as stated in the attached Form shall be imposed on the person requested to attach an attachment order.

【Criminal Power】

On May 12, 200, the defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") were sentenced to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for two years due to the violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims Thereof, and on March 3, 2006, the Seoul Southern District Court sentenced ten months of imprisonment for larceny and completed the execution of the sentence on September 24, 2006. On February 12, 2009, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced one year and six months of imprisonment for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, which became final and conclusive on February 20, 2009.

【Criminal Facts】

At around 19:00 on August 6, 2007, the Defendant: (a) reported the victim Nonindicted Party 1 (Woo, 15 years of age) returned home in Dongducheon-si (hereinafter omitted); and (b) took a shoulder with the victim; (c) met the victim as if he was a deadly weapon, and (d) took the victim’s knife on the side gate of the victim as if he was a deadly weapon, and (d) took the victim into a toilet at Dongducheon-si ( Address omitted).

1. Injury resulting from rape;

At the above time and place, the Defendant met the part of the victim, and made the victim prompt to see her sexual organ, made the victim report the wall back, inserted her sexual organ into the part of the victim's sexual organ in order of the victim's sexual organ behind the victim's back, and her act of self-confising the victim's sound and resistance with the victim's defect that she is standing off. After that, the Defendant tried to re-Rape the victim after sitting the victim on the part of the defendant, but the victim was only the victim's sound and resistance against the defect that she was standing.

Accordingly, the defendant raped the victim, thereby resulting in the victim's non-competence in the number of days of treatment.

2. Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof (Kameras and photographing);

The Defendant took three times the body photographs of the victim using his cell phone camera at the above time and at the above place, and showed the same attitude to spread the body pictures when the victim reported sexual assault.

Accordingly, the defendant taken the body of the victim who could cause a sense of sexual shame using a mobile phone camera against his will.

【Fact of Grounds for Attachment】

A defendant is recognized to have a habit of committing a sexual crime on at least two occasions, and is likely to recommit a sexual crime against a person under the age of 19.

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The police statement of Nonindicted Party 1

1. Medical records for sexual assault victims;

1. Responses to requests for appraisal with the State and notification of the same person as the result of comparison with the DDA;

1. On-site photographs;

1. Previous records: A written inquiry inquiry report, such as a copy of the judgment and criminal records, and the current status of personal identification and confinement;

1. The risk of recidivism of a sexual crime, as indicated in the judgment: The defendant's motive and method of committing the crime of this case, and recognition and attitude of the character, conduct, environment, criminal records, and sex, which are recognized by the above evidence and the written investigation prior to the request for attachment order, are recognized as a risk of recidivism and recidivism of a sexual crime against the defendant.

The defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the injured party's wife is not only unclear whether it was caused by the act of the defendant, but also does not constitute "injury" in the crime of rape.

The following facts and circumstances revealed by the evidence adopted and investigated by this court: ① at the time of the instant case, the victim was a juvenile with no sexual experience of 15 years of age; ② the victim was found to have failed (5:7:9 City/Do 9 City ); ③ the inspection of the victim immediately after the instant case was conducted by the hospital; ③ the inspection of the victim is consistent with the Defendant’s criminal act; ④ the victim’s suffering from sexual intercourse for reasons other than the Defendant’s crime; ⑤ the inspection of the victim’s injury is difficult to be deemed to the extent that it may arise from the sexual intercourse according to daily life or agreement; ② the victim stated in the police investigation that “the victim was a juvenile with no sexual experience of 15 years of age; ② the victim was given three days after the medical treatment at the hospital immediately after the instant case; ② the victim was found to have suffered from the injury of the victim by taking into account the following facts, and the victim’s health injury and injury can be found to have been changed.

Therefore, the defendant and his defense counsel cannot be accepted.

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 301 and 297 of the Criminal Act (the point of injury caused by rape and the choice of limited imprisonment: Provided, That the upper limit of punishment shall be governed by the main sentence of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 10259, Apr. 15, 2010; hereinafter the same shall apply), Article 14-2 (1) of the former Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims Thereof (amended by Act No. 8852, Feb. 29, 2008; hereinafter the same shall apply) (the use of camera photographs; the choice of imprisonment)

1. Aggravation for repeated crimes;

Article 35 (Limits under proviso of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act concerning Crimes of Injury resulting from Rape)

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 (Aggravation of Concurrent Crimes concerning Rape with Punishment heavier than that of the Criminal Act, but within the scope of proviso of Article 42 of the former Criminal Act)

1. Issuing an order to attach an electronic tracking device and matters to be observed;

Article 5(1)3 and 4 of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders; Article 3 and Article 9(1)4 of the former Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders (Amended by Act No. 11558, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter “Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders”); Article 3 and Article 9(1)1 of the same Act; Article 9-2(1)4 of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders;

【Non-Imposition of Disclosure Order】

Article 3(4) of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 10391, Jul. 23, 2010) (amended by Act No. 10391, Jul. 23, 2010) provides that, at the time of the enforcement of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, “any person who has not yet been finally and conclusively declared final and conclusive until then among the persons subject to an order for perusal or perusal for committing a crime (violation) prescribed in the partially amended Act of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Act No. 7801) or the wholly amended Act of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Act No. 8634, Jul. 12, 2012)” (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do

According to Articles 24(1) and 22(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 8634, Aug. 3, 2007; hereinafter the same), which was in force on August 6, 2007 when the criminal facts of the judgment were committed, only "any person who is deemed to have a risk of recommitting a crime under Article 20(2)6 through 8 from among those who were sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment on at least two occasions and were completely or partially executed or exempted for a crime under Article 20(2)6 through 8, who was sentenced to imprisonment without prison labor or heavier punishment on at least two occasions, and thus, the defendant does not constitute a person subject to public disclosure order under the former Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, and thus, the defendant does not constitute a person subject to public disclosure order under Article 20(2) of the former Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims.

【Non-Imposition of Notice Orders】

According to Articles 1 and 4 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 10260, Apr. 15, 201), the crime of this case is subject to an order of notification only where a person first commits a sex offense against a child or juvenile after January 1, 201. Since the crime of this case was committed on August 6, 2007, the defendant is not subject to an order of notification.

1. The scope of punishment;

From 5 years to 30 years of imprisonment;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] In the event of sex crimes and the result of injury, Category 3: (13 or more years of age, injury/injury, Note 2)

【Special Convicted Persons】

- Mitigation elements: (1) minor injuries, (2) no penalty;

- Aggravationd elements: Increase of sexual humiliations of extreme islands (scambing processes);

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendations] Reduction Area, Imprisonment of 3 years to 6 years

[Scope of the revised recommended sentence] Imprisonment for not less than five years [in consideration of the lower limit of the applicable sentence and not applying the upper limit of the recommended sentence to the crimes of violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims Thereof, for which the sentencing guidelines are not set];

3. Determination of sentence;

The crime of this case is deemed to have been committed in view of the following facts: (a) the Defendant forced a juvenile victim in his/her home to take the victim's body by rape, and during the process, and the method and content of the crime are very bad; (b) the Defendant appears to have received a large mental and physical shock of the victim; and (c) the Defendant committed the crime of this case even during the period of repeated crime, even though he/she had been previous and repeated; (b) the Defendant agreed with the victim; (c) the victim was not seriously injured; and (d) the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (thief) of which the judgment became final and conclusive and conclusive has a relation of latter concurrent crimes of Article 39 of the Criminal Act, it is inevitable to impose severe punishment corresponding to the Defendant's liability. In addition, taking into account the following factors into account the Defendant's age, character, and environment; (d) the motive, means

[Attachment]

Judges Lee Jae-dae (Presiding Judge)

1) Article 9(1) proviso of the former Act on the Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders (amended by Act No. 11558, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter “Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders”) provides that “where a person under the age of 13 commits a specific crime against the person under the age of 13, the lower limit of the attachment period shall be increased by twice”. The victim of the instant case was 15 years of age at the time, and thus, the said proviso does not apply.

Note 2) Juvenile rape is included in Category 3.