logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 (전주) 2014.12.02 2014노214
강간미수등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Sexual assault, 80 hours against the defendant.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor, 3 years, order to complete a sexual assault treatment program, 80 hours, and 5 years order of disclosure notification) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the judgment of the defendant on the grounds of appeal regarding similar rape in the facts charged prior to the judgment on the grounds of appeal.

A. Of the facts charged, the prosecutor of the judgment of the court below and the defendant's act of inserting his fingers into the part of the victim's sound and repeating his fingers (hereinafter "the act of similar rape in this case") committed a crime of similar rape in the case of the defendant (the act of similar rape in this case committed a crime of moving his fingers into the part of the defendant's house in front of the D elementary school after the D elementary school, and about about 30 meters in advance). However, in light of the defendant's intention, time of the crime, and the connectedness of the place, it is reasonable to view that the act of similar

(See Supreme Court Decision 70Do1516 delivered on September 29, 1970). B premised on the premise that the former act was a concurrent crime by deeming the victim as a separate criminal act distinct from the attempted rape with respect to the victim, and the former act was instituted separately under Article 297-2 of the Criminal Act. The lower court determined that the crime of rape and similar rape committed in the instant case, such as a prosecutor’s indictment, are in a substantive concurrent relationship, and sentenced the Defendant to three years of imprisonment to the extent that the criminal punishment imposed on the victim was aggravated.

B. The judgment of this Court is 1) Article 297-2 of the Criminal Act provides that a person’s body (excluding sexual intercourse), such as mouth and anus, shall be excluded from the case of assault or intimidation.

) To put in the inner part of a man or a man or a man or a woman or a woman with fingers or any other material (excluding a man or woman).

By stipulating that a person who, in part or in part, commits an act of inserting implements shall be punished by imprisonment for a limited term of not less than two years, the act which can be evaluated as having been raped is more severe than other indecent acts by compulsion.

However, such an act constitutes rape.

arrow