logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2021.01.19 2020노744
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(비밀준수등)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant asserts that there is a justifiable reason for failure to submit basic personal information, since he/she failed to properly obtain notification on imposition of personal information, and failed to properly recognize his/her duty to register.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (700,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. Article 43(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes provides that a person subject to registration of personal information shall submit personal information to the head of a police office having jurisdiction over his/her domicile within 30 days from the date of conviction due to the relevant sex offense prescribed in Article 42, and Article 50(3)1 provides that a person subject to registration shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for not more than one year or by a fine not exceeding five million won if a person subject to registration fails to submit basic personal information without good cause in violation of Article 43(1).

According to the language and purport of the foregoing provision, the circumstance that a person subject to registration is found guilty of a sex offense subject to registration is naturally arising pursuant to Article 43(1) of the same Act, and that a defendant was unaware of the fact that the person subject to registration is not aware of the fact that he/she is obligated to submit personal information as prescribed by the above provision is not merely a legal site and does not hinder the establishment of crime. The fact that a person subject to registration of personal information sent by the Supreme Court was unable to recognize the duty to submit personal information due to the failure to serve the notice on the defendant does not constitute “justifiable cause” under Article 50(3)1 of the same Act (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Do15164, Nov. 27, 2014); Article 33(1), Article 34(3), and Article 54(5)5(2) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012).

arrow