logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구고등법원 2019.08.21 2019노241
아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강간)등
Text

1. The part of the judgment below regarding the defendant's case shall be reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years;

3.Provided, That this judgment shall not apply.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the part of the defendant's case, the punishment (three years of imprisonment and five years of suspended execution) sentenced by the court below to the defendant and the person requesting probation order (hereinafter "defendant") is too uneased and unreasonable.

B. It is unlawful for the court below to dismiss the defendant's request for probation order even though the defendant's request for probation order risks recommitting sexual crimes.

2. Determination

A. We examine the part of the defendant's case ex officio prior to the prosecutor's judgment on the grounds for appeal.

Article 59-3 (1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, which uniformly provides for the restriction on employment of persons with disabilities who are sentenced to punishment for sex offenses against children, juveniles, or adults, is amended by Act No. 15904 on December 11, 2018, and Article 59-3 (1) and (2) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (hereinafter referred to as "Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities") stipulates that the period of restriction on employment shall be differentiated for each defendant of each case in consideration of the seriousness of each offense, the risk of recidivism, etc. When the court sentenced the punishment for individual sex offenses, and Article 2 of the Addenda of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities provides that Article 59-3 of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities shall apply to persons who have committed sex offenses before June 12, 2019, which is the enforcement date of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities and who have not been sentenced to final judgment. In this regard

B. Articles 21-8 and 9(4)4 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders provide that a request for probation order shall be dismissed by judgment when a suspended sentence or suspended sentence is rendered with respect to a specific crime case. As examined below, this court also maintains the court below’s suspended execution of imprisonment with labor against the Defendant, and thus, the prosecutor’s request for probation order against the Defendant.

arrow