logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2019.09.05 2019노175
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(친족관계에의한준강제추행)
Text

Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of unfair sentencing on the defendant and prosecutor’s assertion of unfair sentencing refers to cases where the sentence of the judgment of the court below is too heavy or too minor in light of the specific contents of the case.

Based on the statutory penalty, the sentencing is determined within a reasonable and appropriate range by taking into account the conditions of the sentencing prescribed in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, and there is a unique area of the first instance court in our Criminal Procedure Act, which adopts the trial-oriented principle and the principle of directness.

In addition, considering these circumstances and the ex post facto nature of the appellate court, it is reasonable to respect the sentencing conditions in the event that there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the first instance court, and the sentencing of the first instance court does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, and to refrain from rendering a sentence that does not differ from the first instance court on the sole ground that the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, even though the sentence of the first instance court is somewhat different from the opinion of the appellate court.

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). The lower court, in light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim and the circumstances leading to the crime, etc., as an anti-humanistic crime committed by the instant crime, which committed an indecent act against the Defendant’s home, is not very good in view of the nature of the crime in light of the relationship between the Defendant and the victim, and the circumstances leading to the instant crime, etc., and the degree of indecent act is not easy to lead a daily life due to the instant crime, and the victim appears to have suffered serious mental pain to the extent that the victim and the victim’s family members want to punish the Defendant, taking into account the circumstances unfavorable to the Defendant. However, the Defendant took into account the instant crime.

arrow