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

(b) Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Kidnapping and Inducement for Profit);

(c) Concealment of carcasses;

2013. Before maturity 162 (Joint Attachment Orders)

A person shall be appointed.

Defendant and the respondent for attachment order

Attorney V (National Assembly Line)

Supreme Court Decision 2013Do1687, 2013Do40 (Joint) Decided April 25, 2013

Busan High Court (Chowon), Decision 2013No162, (Chowon), June 13, 2013, 2013

September 12, 2013

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding the accused case

The decision of the court of final appeal rejected on the ground that the argument in the grounds of final appeal is groundless.

At the same time, the defendant can no longer contest against this part, and a refund.

Since the court sent cannot make a decision inconsistent with this, it is no longer the defendant as the defendant.

No claim as to this part may be asserted as the ground of appeal, and even after the case is remanded, the court below erred in this part.

Even if an examination of partial evidence was conducted on the facts of a crime, it is nothing more than that without meaning.

Supreme Court Decision 2011Do8478 Decided October 13, 2011 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Do8478, Oct. 13, 201). Such conclusive power

It is also legitimate that any new argument that was not previously asserted on the birth portion should be delayed.

The grounds of appeal are not allowed (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do2017, Jun. 9, 2006, etc.).

According to the records, the defendant and the respondent for attachment order (this part of the judgment below prior to remand)

H. Violation of law, such as misunderstanding of legal principles, which did not recognize the mental or physical disorder of Defendant(hereinafter “Defendant”)

Defendant’s assertion in the grounds of appeal is not a legitimate ground of appeal in the judgment of remand.

can be seen that the rejection was made on the ground that it was not made. In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, this can be seen as follows.

The rejection of the argument in the grounds of appeal is made simultaneously with the pronouncement of the judgment of remand.

The defendant may no longer dispute this part, and the court that has been remanded shall also have the right to vote against it.

However, the defendant's assertion on this part is no longer a ground for appeal.

The defendant's mental disorder in the part of the defendant's case cannot be recognized for the same purpose.

The allegation in the grounds of appeal that there was no illegality or misapprehension of legal principles is legitimate.

In addition, among the judgment below, there is an error in the disclosure and notification order in the part of the defendant's case.

The argument to the purport that the ground of appeal was previously rejected.

Since the new argument that did not have been made should be delayed, such argument in the grounds of appeal also be justified.

No legitimate ground of appeal may be a ground of appeal.

And the defendant's age, criminal records, character and conduct, environment, family relationship, motive, means and process of committing the crime, crime

Examining the various circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing, including the latter circumstances, the lower court’s inorganic sentencing against the Defendant.

Since maintaining the judgment of the court of first instance which sentenced a prison sentence cannot be deemed to be extremely unfair, this cannot be said to be unfair.

The ground of appeal on this point is without merit.

2. As to the case of the request for attachment order

According to the records, the defendant appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance and brought an appeal against the defendant.

Only one of the parties asserted unfair sentencing. In such a case, the defendant is a sexual crime and minor.

The judgment of the court of first instance on the premise that there is a risk of recommitting the crime of abduction and murder.

The argument that the part of the judgment of the court below that the request for attachment order is unlawful is legitimate.

No grounds for appeal may be the grounds for appeal. Furthermore, an appeal on the part of the lower judgment regarding the claim for attachment order

There is no violation of law as alleged in the reason.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

shall be ruled.

Justices Kim So-young

Justices Shin Young-chul

Note Justice Lee Sang-hoon

Justices Kim Yong-deok