2013Gohap261 Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

special cases concerning the punishment, etc. of sexual crimes,

Violations (Rape of Minors under thirteen years of age) and Sexual Crimes Action

Act on Special Cases concerning Punishment, etc. (Compulsory Succession by Relatives)

(2) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (13)

Minor indecent acts by compulsion)

2013. The attachment order (Joint)

Persons whose attachment order is requested;

Yellow (68 years old, South)

Residential Suwon City

Standard place of registration:

Kim-hee (Lawsuits of Prosecution) and Red Roster (Trial)

Attorney Seo-il (Korean National Assembly Line)

July 4, 2013

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

The defendant shall order the completion of a sexual assault treatment program for 80 hours.

Disclosure of information on the accused shall be made public through an information and communications network for five years.

The defendant shall be notified of the information for five years.

The request for the attachment order of this case is dismissed.

Criminal facts

The defendant is the fluoral father of the victim ○○○ (nive, November 23, 2004).

On November 26, 2012, the Defendant was strokeed by the brain stroke and was under brain surgery, and was living together with the victim a day. On November 26, 2012, the Defendant had strokeed the victim with her desire, and had her sexual desire by committing an indecent act or sexual intercourse with the victim.

1. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act by Marriage) and violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act by Minor

On December 19, 2012: (a) around 00, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim at least eight times in total, as listed in the attached list of crimes (1) up to January 2, 2013, by committing an indecent act against the victim under 13 years of age, by forcing him/her to take part in the victim’s inner clothes again at around 11:00 on a day. At around 00, the Defendant committed an indecent act against the victim under 13 years of age, by forcing him/her to take part in the victim’s inner clothes, and by force him/her to take part in the victim’s inner clothes, from the time to January 2, 2013.

2. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Relatives) and violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Minors under thirteen years of age

The Defendant, at around January 3, 2013, 2013, she dumped from the Defendant’s house bed in the bed of the Defendant’s house located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the area adjacent to the victim (the age of 8), prevented the victim from resisting the victim, and subtracting the victim’s chest, she dump by inserting the victim’s finger by inserting the hand into the part of the victim’s bed, and tried to get off the victim’s bed off the part of the victim’s bed, and inserted the Defendant’s sexual organ into the part of the victim’s bed. However, the Defendant attempted to rape the victim under the age of 13 over 18 times in total from that time until January 3, 2013, while the victim refused to do so, from that time, and tried to commit rape from that time to January 2, 2013.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each protocol of examination of the accused by prosecutors;

1. Recording records of the police with respect to Yellow Dust ○;

1. A complaint filed on the preparation of yellow ○○;

1. A criminal investigation report (documents to be submitted, such as suspect's statement of opinion, etc.);

1. A certified copy of resident registration, family relation certificate, counseling center, psychological evaluation report, and written opinion of experts in child sexual assault;

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

A. Each fact listed in the judgment of the court below: Article 5(2) of the former Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (wholly amended by Act No. 11556, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply), Article 298 of the Criminal Act (a point of indecent act by blood and marriage by blood and marriage), Article 7 (3) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, Article 298 of the Criminal Act (a point of indecent act by blood and marriage against minors under the age of 13);

(b) Each fact in Article 2 of the judgment: Articles 14 and 5(1) of the former Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; Article 297 of the former Criminal Act (amended by Act No. 11574, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply); Articles 14 and 7(1) of the former Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; Article 297 of the former Criminal Act (a person who attempted rape with a minor under 13 years of age);

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act

[Punishment stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act by Relatives) and the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Acts by Minors under thirteen years of age)]

[Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Relatives) and Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with Minors under thirteen years of age)]

1. Selection of punishment;

Selection of a limited term of imprisonment for a crime in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape of Minors)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act [the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act / [the punishment and punishment shall be imposed from among concurrent crimes with punishment stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape of Minors under Age 13) (No. 18 No. 18) on January 2

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances in favor of the reasons for sentencing)

1. Order to complete programs;

Article 4 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Act No. 11572), the main text of Article 21(2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

1. An order for disclosure;

The main sentence of Article 38(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply)

1. An order to notify;

The main sentence of Article 38-2 (1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

Grounds for sentencing

1. The scope of punishment by law;

From 5 years to 22 years of imprisonment;

2. Scope of sentence by the sentencing criteria; and

(a) Basic crime: A person who attempts to commit a crime in violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Rape with a minor who is under thirteen years of age) in the judgment of the court, and thus does not apply the sentencing criteria

(b) Concurrent crimes: Crimes in violation of the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes listed in the judgment No. 1 (Indecent Act by Compulsion of Minors under thirteen years of age);

[Determination of Type] Sex Crime Group, General Criteria, Sex Offenses against the Age of 13, Type 3 (Indecent Act by Compulsion)

【Special Aggravations: None of the elements of increase or decrease:

[Scope of Recommendations] Imprisonment of 4 years to 7 years (basic areas)

[General Aggravation] Aggravations: In the case of a crime in the form of Article 5 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the use of personal trust relationship

Reduction element: Serious reflect

(c) Criteria for handling multiple crimes;

The lower limit of the range of sentence recommended by the sentencing guidelines is lower than the lower limit of the statutory applicable sentencing range, and thus, the lower limit of the applicable sentencing range is set at the lower limit of the applicable sentencing range in law.

3. Determination of sentence;

Although the Defendant, as his father, is responsible for protecting and raising a child’s her father, he/she has committed an anti-human act of attempting rape against the victim repeatedly over 26 times in total during the short period of 26 times by taking advantage of his/her superior position that he/she has not established sexual values as a tool to take the victim’s sexual desire, and committing an anti-human act of indecent act by compulsion. Such a crime is extremely poor, and the possibility of criticism is very high. The victim suffered serious mental shock, such as suffering from the initial insectide of the damage of this case, and the Defendant’s family members are scattered and scattered due to the instant crime, etc., taking account of the following factors: (a) the Defendant should be punished strictly.

However, since the beginning of the investigation, the defendant led to the confession of all of his crime, and there is no record of criminal punishment except for the defendant's punishment for traffic crime on May 1994. On November 26, 2012, the day before the defendant committed the crime in this case, he was under a brain stroke surgery, such as he was unable to memory the past at the time of the crime in this case, and he was under a serious aftermath surgery. Although the defendant was in a state of mental disability at the time of the crime in this case, he was not in a state of mental disorder at the time of the crime in this case, it appears that the above cerebr operation after the cerebr operation of the defendant was affected by the crime in this case, and this ○○, the mother of the defendant's wife and the victim, submitted an application to this court for thomb and made a statement that the defendant did not want the punishment.

Furthermore, according to the sentencing investigation report according to the court's order of the sentencing investigation of the sentencing investigator, "I would like to see (Defendant)" of the sentencing investigator? "I would like to see that I would like to see as before. I would like to see that I would like to see "I would like to see (I would like to see) the victim's "I would like to see (I would like to see) well, and if I would like to see, I would like to see (I would like to see)," "I would like to see (I would like to see, I would like to see, I would like to see (I would like to see)," and "I would like to see that I would like to see (I would like to see, I would like to see, if I would like to see, I would like to see) the age of the victim, such as the defendant's father's reply, and if I would like to do so?

Where a conviction is finalized on each crime in the judgment, the defendant is a person subject to registration of personal information pursuant to Article 33(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles, and the defendant is obligated to submit personal information to the competent agency pursuant to Article 4(2) and Article 43 of the Addenda of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Act No. 11556).

Part requesting attachment of location tracking device

1. Summary of the request for attachment order;

A person who is requested to attach an attachment order, as stated in the judgment, has committed a sexual crime on at least two occasions against a person under the age of 19, and such person is deemed to have a habit of committing a sexual crime, and is likely to recommit

2. Determination

The “risk of recidivism of a sexual crime” as prescribed by Article 5(1) of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders means that the possibility of recidivism is insufficient solely with the possibility of re-offending, and that there is a probable probability that the person subject to the request to attach an electronic device may injure the legal peace by committing a sexual crime again in the future. The existence of the risk of recidivism of a sexual crime shall be objectively determined by comprehensively assessing various circumstances, such as the occupation and environment of the person subject to the request to attach an electronic device, the criminal conduct prior to the crime, the motive, means, the circumstances after the crime, the circumstances after the crime, and the situation after the crime, etc., and such determination shall be based on the time of the judgment, since it is a constructive judgment on the future (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do7410, 2010Do444, Dec.

In light of the above legal principles, the records show the following as follows: ① although the person subject to the request for an attachment order was punished for imprisonment without prison labor for a traffic crime once, there was no record of committing serious crimes, such as sex crimes, and violence; ② As a result of the risk assessment of a sexual offender in Korea against the person subject to the request for the attachment order (K - STRAS), it falls under 9 points that are in the middle of the risk of recidivism; but this is relatively low in the middle level (total point point point 7 to 12), it is close to the area of the “low”, and it falls under 9 points that fall under the interim level of “the risk of recidivism”, but it is also difficult to conclude that the person subject to the request for attachment order falls under the lowest area of the middle level (total point 7 to 24 points), ③ it is difficult for the person subject to the attachment order to commit a sexual crime again due to a special relationship between him/her and a large number of unspecified persons, and there is no need for the attachment order of this case.

Therefore, the request for the attachment order of this case is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 9(4)1 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders.

Judges Kim Jong-hwan -

Judges Jeon Soo-tae

The number of judges;

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.