beta
Text
The judgment below
Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.
Defendant
A.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A misunderstanding the fact that Defendant A had sexual intercourse with the victim jointly with Defendant B.
Defendant
Although the truth response was found as a result of the false oral detection test against A, the lower court convicted Defendant A of the facts charged by the statements without credibility of the victim, N, J, etc.
2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (long-term 6 years of imprisonment, short-term 5 years of imprisonment, 120 hours of order) is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, Defendant B, who, in turn, ordered Defendant A to add a detailed attitude to sexual intercourse.
On the other hand, there is no room for Defendant A to enter the toilet with Defendant A to put him into the toilet, and there is no fact that Defendant B conspiredd with or shared the act of sexual intercourse with Defendant A. Thus, the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes cannot be applied to Defendant B.
However, in relation to Defendant B’s sexual intercourse with the victim, only the aiding and abetting of quasi-rape can be established in relation to the attempted quasi-rape under the Criminal Act and the sexual intercourse with Defendant A’s victim.
2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B (five years of imprisonment, 120 hours of order) is too unreasonable.
2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by Defendant A’s ex officio, Defendant A’s judgment on the grounds for appeal by the lower court was ex officio, and Defendant A was sentenced to an illegal sentence by falling under “juvenile” as provided by Article 2 of the Juvenile Act at the time of the declaration of the lower judgment, but it is apparent that Defendant A did not constitute a juvenile under the age of 19 in the first instance trial. As such, the part of the lower judgment that sentenced Defendant A to an illegal sentence is no longer maintained.
However, there is a reason to reverse the judgment of the court below on the part of defendant A, which is still subject to the judgment of this court.