Defendant and the respondent for attachment order

Both parties

Happar Constitution

Attorney Park Sung-sung (Korean)

Gwangju District Court Decision 2008 Gohap202, 208, 2008 Gowon1 (Consolidated) Decided December 18, 2008

All appeals filed by the defendant and the person subject to the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

(a) The defendant case;

Considering various sentencing conditions, including the fact that the Defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter, the Defendant) are against the depth of the Defendant, the sentence of the lower court (one-year imprisonment) is too unreasonable, and the prosecutor is deemed unfair in view of various sentencing conditions, such as the fact that the nature of the instant crime is very bad.

(b) Requests for attachment orders;

It is too unreasonable that the court below ordered the defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for five years, and the prosecutor's order the defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for five years is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Part of the defendant's case

The victim Nonindicted 1 and 2 of the crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes are the favorable circumstances for the defendant. However, each of the crimes of this case is not necessary measures such as aiding and abetting Nonindicted 3 with the front part of the above son while driving a son, and aiding and abetting Nonindicted 3 with the victim Nonindicted 3 with the helper Nonindicted 3 with the helper Nonindicted 3 with the helper Nonindicted 3 with the helper’s injury during the above son while driving the son, and it does not take necessary measures such as aiding and abetting Nonindicted 3 with the helper. As if sending the son back to the hospital, the victim Nonindicted 3 was born to the above son Nonindicted 3 by threatening him against his resistance, and rape the victim Nonindicted 3, and thereby, the Defendant committed the crime of this case with the aim of causing injury to the victim Nonindicted 3 for a period of two weeks, which is disadvantageous to the defendant, and there is no reason to view the lower court’s punishment of the crime of this case, including the injury of rape and rape of the victim.

B. Part of the attachment order case

On January 7, 200, the Defendant was sentenced to three years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of bodily rape in the Gwangju District Court's Netcheon Branch. On September 2, 2004, the Defendant was sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of bodily rape in the Daejeon District Court's Seosan Branch on September 2, 2004, and again committed a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and the Protection of Victims Thereof (Rape, etc.) after about one year and ten months from the date on which the execution of the sentence was completed on November 23, 2006. In full view of the circumstances leading up to the instant crime, the Defendant's age, character and behavior, environment, circumstances after the crime, sexual crime history, distance, and the number of repeated crimes, etc., the lower court's order to attach an electronic tracking device to the Defendant for five years is too excessive or unreasonable, and the Defendant and the prosecutor's assertion above are without merit.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is without merit, it is all dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, Article 35 of the Act on the Electronic Monitoring of Specific Sexual Offenders, and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by the court below.

Judge Lee Han-ju (Presiding Judge)