logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2016.12.22 2016노306
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(특수준강간)등
Text

All parts of the judgment of the court below against Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and eight months.

Reasons

1. Ex officio determination (the part concerning Defendant B in the original judgment) This court joined the appeal case against the first and second original judgment. The crime of the lower judgment against Defendant B is one of the concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and thus, one sentence should be pronounced.

In this respect, the part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant B cannot be maintained as is.

2. The lower court found the Defendants not guilty of this part of the charges charged on the part of the Defendants on the ground that, by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, the Defendants’ assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the Defendants’ violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (special quasi-rape) was found, the Defendants, on their own initiative, went back to the cartel, and the Defendants, attempted to commit sexual intercourse with each other, found that the rest of the Defendants was in singing in the singing room near the cartel, and on the ground that at the time when the Defendants intended to have sexual intercourse with each other, the rest of the Defendants had been entirely separated from each other at the time of the individual sexual intercourse, and did not have a situation to directly

Examining the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below in a thorough comparison with the facts admitted by the court below, the judgment of the court below is justified.

There is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as argued by the prosecutor as grounds for appeal.

We do not accept the prosecutor's assertion.

3. The crime of sexual assault in this case against Defendant A, E, and the prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing is deemed to have sexual intercourse with the Defendants and B in the order of indecent act by force against the victims who have been unable to resist due to alcohol, and the nature of the crime is very poor in light of the background and method of the crime.

The victims of sexual assault seem to have received a large sense of sexual humiliation and mental impulse due to the instant case.

However, the Defendants are victims.

arrow