(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.06.15 2018노972 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.06.15 2018노972

준강제추행등

Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Part 1 of the case of the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order to whom the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order to whom the court below sentenced the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order (hereinafter "the defendant") (hereinafter "the defendant") to the punishment of the court below (the imprisonment of eight months and the completion of the sexual assault treatment program) is too unreasonable.

2) Prosecutor A) The sentence imposed by the lower court against the Defendant that was unfair in sentencing is too unhued and unfair.

B) Considering the fact that the criminal defendant, who was unreasonably exempted from disclosure or notification order, repeats the same criminal act against many unspecified persons, it is unreasonable for the court below to exempt the defendant from disclosure or notification order of personal information because it is due to misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles.

B. Considering the fact that the Defendant repeats the same method of crime as above, dismissing the Defendant’s request for attachment order of an electronic tracking device due to misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, and thus, is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The crime of this case was committed against an unspecified person in the letter or the surface of the water that was used by an unspecified number of people, and the crime of this case was committed against an unspecified person. The victim got a considerable mental impulse due to the crime of this case, the defendant did not receive any specific measure to recover damage to the victim, and the defendant did not take any specific measure to recover damage to the victim, and the defendant committed the crime of this case when he had been punished twice for the same crime, which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the defendant's mistake recognized and reflects his depth, and later he receives various kinds of inspections and treatments from a hospital.

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 2018.04.12 2017노764

-서울고등법원 2018.03.23 2017노3721

-서울고등법원 2018.04.06 2018노268

-서울고등법원 2016.04.21 2016노232

-부산고등법원 2018.05.03 2018노129