logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.08.18 2015노1699
준강간등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

It is improper that the court below ordered the disclosure of Defendant's personal information.

Judgment

Each of the instant crimes constitutes a sex offense subject to registration of personal information under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes.

The Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse provide that the personal information of a person who has committed a sex offense subject to registration shall be exempted only when it is judged that there is a "special circumstance" that shall not be an exception.

However, in full view of the type, motive, method and content of each of the crimes of this case which can be recognized by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, severity of the crime, the degree and expected side effects of the disadvantage of the defendant due to the disclosure notification order, the effect of preventing sex crimes that can be achieved, and the effect of protecting the victim, etc., even if the defendant has no record of punishment for sexual crimes prior to the crime of this case, or considering the family relation and social relation between the defendant and the victim, it cannot be deemed that there exists a "special circumstance" that may not disclose and notify the personal information of the defendant, and the period is appropriate.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is without merit.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.

(However) However, the victim's age under Paragraph (1) of the "criminal facts" is clear that the victim's age is "25", and the victim's age under Paragraph (2) is "21" and "20 years". Thus, the victim's age is correct in accordance with Article 25 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.

arrow