logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.10.28.선고 2020노2073 판결
강제추행
Cases

2020No2073 Indecent Act by compulsion

Defendant

A

Appellant

Defendant

Prosecutor

The largest leaps (prosecutions) and the Park Jong-chul (Trial)

Defense Counsel

Law Firm Taewon

Attorney Song Jin-jin

The judgment below

Gwangju District Court Decision 2020 Godan2259 Decided August 12, 2020

Imposition of Judgment

oly 2020 10,28

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive, and the defendant shall be ordered to attend sexual assault treatment lectures for 80 hours.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

The punishment of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

Not only the Defendant committed an indecent act against the face value of the victim, but also committed an indecent act by drinking the chest or having the chest fast up even though the victim was refused to continue to exist. In light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, the degree of indecent act and the father, etc., the crime is not good. The victim appears to have suffered considerable mental shock due to the Defendant’s criminal act.

However, the Defendant shows the form of recognizing and opposing a crime, and the victim received a letter from the victim during the time of the trial, and the victim does not want to punish the Defendant. The Defendant is an initial offender with no criminal record. In full view of all of the sentencing conditions in the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means, consequence, and circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is deemed unreasonable.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the following decision is

【Discretionary Judgment】

Criminal facts and summary of evidence

The summary of the facts constituting the crime recognized by this court and the evidence related thereto are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and therefore, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 298 of the Criminal Code, Selection of Imprisonment

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Order to attend lectures;

An order to disclose and notify personal information under the main sentence of Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and exemption from employment restriction

Considering the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of recidivism, motive, method, seriousness of the crime in this case, disclosure order, notification order, and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s disadvantage and expected side effects that may be achieved therefrom, and the prevention effect of sexual crimes that may be achieved therefrom, the Defendant is obliged to disclose personal information of the Defendant and to submit such information to a public institution under the proviso to Article 47(1) and Article 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the proviso to Article 49(1) and Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, Article 2 of the Addenda to the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 1622, Nov. 26, 2019); Article 56(1) of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 1738, Jun. 22, 2020); Article 59-3(1) of the Welfare Act.

Judges

The presiding judge, Kim Jin-jin

Judges Park Dong-chul

Judges Kang Sung-sung

arrow