2013No576 Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

special treatment on the punishment, etc. of sexual crimes, etc.

Violation of the Funeral Law (Rape of Persons with Disabilities)

2013 Order to attach 66(Consolidated)

A

Defendant and the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor

The maximum punishment (prosecution) and the number of stuffs (public trial)

Attorney B

Busan District Court Decision 2013Gohap424, 2013 Jeonsoki21 (Consolidated) decided October 18, 2013

Judgment

December 19, 2013

All appeals filed by the defendant and the person subject to the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Part of the defendant's case

A. Summary of grounds for appeal

1) Defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”);

In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court (eight years of imprisonment, 120 hours of order to complete a program of sexual assault treatment) is too unreasonable.

(ii)a prosecutor;

In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too uneasible and unfair.

B. Determination

The sentencing factors against the Defendant include the following: (a) the Defendant was sentenced to a quasi-rape crime against the victim who is a victim of class 1 of intellectual disability 1; (b) again committed the instant crime against the same victim during the period of repeated crime; and (c) the instant crime is an anti-human criminal act which the Defendant, who is the victim, should protect the victim; (d) in light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim; (e) the victim’s intelligence; (e) the repetition of the crime; and (e) the nature of the crime is very serious; and (e) the victim appears to have suffered mental or physical pain due to the instant crime.

As a factor of sentencing favorable to the defendant, the fact that the defendant has led to all of the crimes of this case and has reflectd them, and the father of the victim and the victim are the wife of the defendant.

In full view of the aforementioned factors of sentencing and other factors of sentencing as indicated in the argument of this case, such as the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, and family relationship, it is not recognized that the sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant is deemed reasonable, and is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is without merit.

2. Part on the case of request for attachment order;

As long as the Defendant and the prosecutor filed an appeal against the part of the lower judgment regarding the Defendant case, the part regarding the claim for attachment order against a specific criminal pursuant to Article 9(8) of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Electronic Offenders shall be deemed to have filed an appeal. However, there is no legitimate ground for appeal as to the part regarding the claim for attachment order in the statement of grounds for appeal submitted by the Defendant and the prosecutor, and no illegality exists that can be considered as the grounds for ex officio examination or ex officio judgment even if examining the lower judgment on

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal filed by the defendant and the prosecutor is all dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 35 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders.

Kim Jong-cheon (Presiding Judge)

Gangwon-domen' accommodation

Freeboard Kim