beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") have only expressed the victim's chest, and there was no intention to rape the victim.
B. The Defendant with mental disorder was a mental disorder at the time of committing the crime.
C. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court determined that: (a) the Defendant was guilty of rape in light of the following: (b) the Defendant: (a) confirmed at night the victim, who entered the string column of the toilet inside the drone of the rare building, string the front of the toilet, and shut down the outside iron door of the toilet; (c) the victim followed the Defendant, outside the string of the string section, string the victim’s neck in his arms, and damaged the bottom into the floor; and (c) the Defendant heards the victim’s chest, as soon as possible, and sees the victim’s horses, which would cause harm to the sex; and (d) re-afusing the victim’s neck.
The court below's determination that the defendant had the intent to rape the victim at the time of committing the crime of this case is justified in finding that the defendant, recognized by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, posted his hand to the inside of the victim, took the victim's clothes above, and promptly added the chest.
Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.
B. In light of the contents of a mental appraisal document attached to the notification of the result of a mental appraisal by the Medical Treatment and Custody Director for a request for mental diagnosis of a party with regard to a mental diagnosis, the defendant understood and properly responded without any difficulties in questioning in the psychological examination, some of the issues of the defendant are of the nature, but it does not seem to be systematic net or mental symptoms, and thus, in this case, it is concerned.