logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 여주지원 2019.07.08 2018고단789
특정범죄자에대한보호관찰및전자장치부착등에관한법률위반등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and a fine of three million won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

(Criminal) On November 29, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Acts such as Minors, Minors, etc. under the age of 13), 5 years, 10 years, and 00 to 06:00 each day during the period of attachment of the electronic device, and 00 to 06:00 each day during the period of attachment of the electronic device, and completed the execution of the sentence on August 26, 2017.

(Criminal Facts)

1. A person who has an electronic device installed with a deviation from the scope of response to the electronic device shall not arbitrarily separate or damage the electronic device from his/her body during the period of attachment of the electronic device, interfere with its propagation, alter data received, or otherwise impair its utility;

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from December 4, 2017 to April 26, 2018, deserted the scope of response to the portable tracking device over 11 times, as shown in the attached Table 1, thereby impairing the utility of the electronic device.

2. A person wearing an electronic device or a person on probation who has violated special matters to be observed shall not violate such matters to be observed without justifiable grounds, such as at night;

Nevertheless, the Defendant, from January 10, 2018 to May 20, 2018, went out from 10 times to 06:00 to 06:00 as shown in the attached Table 2, and violated the above special rules.

The defendant alleged that a portable tracking device caused malfunction, and that the defendant intentionally deserted the scope of responding to the tracking device, or did not violate the code of conduct for prohibition of outing.

However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, i.e., the Defendant did not report to the person in charge of the probation office that the portable tracking device was broken down. ii)

arrow