logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2015.11.19 2015노592
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Sexual assault, 80 hours against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, the punishment imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment and 80 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the various sentencing conditions in the instant case by the Prosecutor, it is unreasonable to exempt the above sentence imposed by the lower court from the disclosure notification order, as well as too unfluent.

2. Examining the various sentencing conditions in the instant case, each of the instant crimes was committed by threatening a victim who had been a deadly related relationship at the time of the Defendant, with a knife, and subsequently, took photographs of his body, etc. against the victim’s will to inflict bodily injury. In light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, the nature and circumstances of the crime, the details and the method of the crime, etc., are very poor, and the victim appears to have suffered significant pain for a considerable period of time due to each of the instant crimes, etc., which are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

However, in light of the following factors: (a) the Defendant committed all the instant crimes, including the part partially denied at the lower court’s trial, and thereby shamping and reflecting his mistake; (b) the Defendant did not want the punishment of the Defendant by mutual consent between the victim and the first offender; (c) the Defendant’s age, character, conduct and environment; (d) family relationship; (e) family relationship; (e) health status; (e) motive, means and method of the crime; and (e) circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence imposed by the lower court is somewhat unreasonable.

In addition, the prosecutor asserts that the court below exempted the defendant from the "disclosure order and notification order", but the circumstances favorable to the defendant, the background leading up to the crime of this case, the relation with the victim, the age, occupation, family environment, and the circumstances after the crime.

arrow