The case holding that a concurrent crime is committed when several victims are leaptable;

As long as the victim conspired to rape and resulting in the result of each injury by rape of the victims, even if the defendant did not commit a direct rape, he/she cannot be exempted from liability in accordance with the legal principles of a joint principal offender, and each victim's injury resulting from rape is established, and thus, he/she shall be punished as a concurrent principal offender.

Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 301 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Daegu District Court of First Instance (69Da1932 delivered on January 1, 200)

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a short term of three years and four years.

One hundred thirty-five days of detention days prior to the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below shall be included in the original sentence.

The gist of each of the grounds for appeal by the defendant himself and his defense counsel is that the defendant was well aware of the past from the past to the victim non-indicted 1, 2, etc., and he met with the non-indicted 7 relatives at the time of the instant case, or when the defendant was playing in order to have a relationship with the non-indicted 1 among the victims, he throw away away from the defendant's drinking, and the defendant did not have a relationship with the victim by putting the victim in order with the non-indicted 1. However, the court below did not err in misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of injury resulting from rape on the basis of the false content prepared by the police and the prosecution, and rejected the judgment below's erroneous determination of facts and unfair sentencing by taking into account the fact that compromise between the defendant's age and future and the victim, etc. after the crime of rape and the non-indicted 2's statement that the defendant did not have a direct relation with the victim's testimony and the non-indicted 1, etc., and there was no sufficient result in the court below's argument that the defendant's statement and the non-indicted 2.

In full view of all the circumstances that are conditions for sentencing such as the defendant's age, reputation, environment, relationship with the victim, etc., motive of the crime and means of the crime, etc., which can be seen by the records, the court below's sentencing for a short term of three years and four years, which sentenced the defendant to a long term of four years, shall not be deemed to be grave, and thus, the argument of this issue

However, according to the reasoning of the court below's judgment, the defendant conspireds with each other to rape the victim non-indicted 1, 2, etc. as stated in the non-indicted 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, etc., and the victim non-indicted 1 was raped in order for about 10 days, and Non-indicted 6, 7, 8, 9 et al. were raped in order for about 10 days to receive medical treatment for about 10 days, and the court below's decision that the non-indicted 2 was unable to be exempted from criminal punishment because the non-indicted 3, 4, and 5 did not constitute a so-called "non-indicted 1, 297" crime under the former part of the Criminal Act because the non-indicted 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 et al. did not constitute a so-called "non-indicted 1, 297, and thus, the court below did not reverse the legal principles as seen above.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the member is again decided.

Criminal facts and evidence against the defendant admitted as a member of the party are the same as that of the judgment of the court below since the defendant and the witness in the trial process of the party in the evidence added the contents of the statement in accordance with the facts in the prosecutor's statement as to the non-indicted 2 and the prosecutor's non-indicted 2.

The so-called "nomenclatures" in the law, each of which falls under Articles 301, 297, and 30 of the Criminal Act, and each of the above two crimes is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the same Act. Since the above two crimes are concurrent crimes under Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, the punishment for rape injury to non-indicted 1 is aggravated and there are grounds for considering the circumstances of the crime. Thus, within the scope of punishment mitigated under Articles 53 and 55 (1) 3 of the same Act, the defendant is a juvenile under Article 2 of the Juvenile Act within the scope of punishment mitigated under Article 54 (1) of the same Act, and the defendant is punished by imprisonment for a short term of three years and four years under Article 54 (1) of the same Act, and 135 days of the number of detention days before the sentence is included in the above sentence under Article 57 of the Criminal Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Choi Hon-ro (Presiding Judge)