beta
Text
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.
However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of five years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. After committing a violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, the Defendant asserted that he/she was guilty, he/she had one of the victims’ domestic OPO portable phone, but did not bring about KRW 100,000,000 to the victim’s 6 PPO mobile phone.
However, there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the fact that the court below found this part of the facts charged guilty.
B. The sentence of the lower court (a 6-year imprisonment, a 40-hour order to provide sexual assault treatment programs, and a 5-year restriction on employment) on the ground that the sentence was unduly unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. On December 30, 2017, from around 19:30 to 21:26, the summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant: (b) committed a theft of the victim’s property owned by the victim as a total amount of KRW 100,000 in cash, and KRW 600,000 in the market price of the victim’s possession, following the victim’s external speculative machine, etc., in addition to the victim’s market price of KRW 600,000,000 in Korea, from around December 30, 2017 to around 21:402; and (c) the victim’s property owned by the victim, the victim’s market price of KRW 130,000,00,00 in total, went out with a flus portable phone with a 60,000,000 in Korea.
2) The lower court’s judgment found the Defendant guilty of all the charges based on the evidence in its reasoning.
3) Even based on the victim’s statement (Evidence 10 pages) and statement protocol (Evidence Record 39 pages), the victim did not have two Handphones and Handphones.
Only the statement was made.
In this regard, on December 31, 2017, the investigation report (Evidence No. 9 page) states that "(victim) loses his or her care or did not clearly state whether he or she was stolen, and it is necessary to confirm it after prosecution."
In addition, the investigation report on January 19, 2018 (Evidence No. 170 pages of evidence records) is accompanied by the telephone conversations (V) after the crime.