beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.
Defendant
B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months.
except that this shall not apply.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles) voluntarily sought sex purchase to engage in commercial sex acts, and the Defendant is limited to the list of crimes in attached Form 1 to the judgment below (hereinafter “crime list”).
(2) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged based on D’s statement without credibility, etc., as stated in Articles 3 through 10 of the Criminal Act. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the mistake of facts, credibility of statement, and joint principal offender, etc. (2) The sentencing of the Defendant is too unreasonable.
B. According to the prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts D’s statements at investigation agencies and the court below’s decision, the defendants’ and D’s telephone records, sending and reverse sending stations, etc., it is recognized that the defendants assisted the defendants to purchase the sex of D, a child or juvenile “for business” through 10 times in total, as stated in the crime sight table. Nevertheless, the court below acquitted each of the charges of this case on the part of the brokerage of sexual traffic as defined in paragraphs 1 and 2 of the crime sight table and "the act of mediating the purchase of sex of children and juveniles for business" as a whole, and acquitted each of the "the act of mediating the purchase of sex of children and juveniles for business." This judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
2. According to the ex officio judgment records as to Defendant B, the defendant was sentenced to four years of imprisonment with prison labor for robbery, injury by robbery, etc. on June 11, 2020, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on June 19, 2020. The above crimes and each of the crimes in the judgment below, which became final and conclusive, are concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and are equitable in cases where the judgment is rendered simultaneously in accordance with Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act.