beta
Text
The judgment below
The part of the defendant's case shall be reversed.
Defendant
Imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of two years and six months, for A, B, C, E, and G.
Reasons
1. With respect to the part of the Defendant case, the lower court rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request regarding the part on which the request for attachment order against A, B, and C was filed, and the Defendants appealed only with respect to the part on which the request for attachment order against A, B, and C was filed, and thus, notwithstanding Article 9(8) of the Act on Probation and Location Monitoring, the part on which the request for attachment order against the specific criminal was filed is excluded from the scope of the trial of this court.
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A, B, D1) A, B, and D had weak ability to distinguish things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime. 2) Each punishment sentenced by the lower court to the said Defendants (the maximum of three years of imprisonment, and the short of two years) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant C, E, F, and G (Defendant C, E, and G: Imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of three years, short of two years, and Defendant F: imprisonment with prison labor for three years) declared by the court below to the above Defendants are too unreasonable.
3. Determination
A. As to the Defendant A, B, and D’s assertion of mental disability, it is recognized that the said Defendants were in the state of drinking alcohol at the time of committing the instant special rape.
However, in light of the background leading up to the conspiracy of the instant crime and the background leading up to the commission of the instant crime, and the behavior leading up to the instant crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the said Defendants had the weak ability to discern things or make decisions under the influence of alcohol at the time of the instant crime.
Therefore, the above Defendants’ assertion on this part cannot be accepted.
B. As to the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendants committed the instant special rape in advance.