logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.08.05 2019노2385
강제추행
Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as a recipient of basic living security, is not in a good health condition. Considering the fact that all the facts of the instant crime were committed, the Defendant’s mistake is against the depth and there is no record of punishment exceeding the fine, and that there was a contingent crime under the influence of alcohol, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. In light of the motive of the instant crime committed by the public prosecutor and the nature of the indecent act, and the attitude of the act, it is unreasonable for the lower court to have deemed that there was no effort to recover the damage, even though the nature of the crime was less severe than that of the victim, and that there was considerable mental suffering.

2. Determination

A. Under the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, which takes the trial-oriented principle and the direct principle, where there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared to the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to respect it.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). B.

In light of the above legal principles, the court below sentenced the defendant to the above punishment on the grounds of the sentencing stated in its reasoning. The circumstances alleged by the defendant and the prosecutor are already considered in the court below's sentencing, and there are no new sentencing data that could change the sentence of the court below in the court below. In addition, considering the defendant's age, character, environment, criminal records, criminal records, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment against the defendant is deemed appropriate, and it cannot be recognized that the defendant exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion because it is too heavy or unfeasible.

arrow