beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The court below rendered a judgment dismissing the prosecutor’s request regarding a prosecuted case’s conviction, the case claiming an attachment order, and the case claiming a probation order, and only the prosecutor appealed on the ground of unfair sentencing only for the prosecuted case among the judgment below.
(The Prosecutor stated in the petition of appeal that the scope of appeal is “in whole,” but the case number is only indicated as “Jinwon District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Board Decision 201No. 76). However, as long as the Prosecutor filed an appeal against the accused case, it is deemed that an appeal was filed regarding the request for attachment order and the request for probation order under Articles 9(8) and 21-8 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders
2. The summary of the grounds for appeal is unreasonable as it is too unfasible to the punishment (two years and six months of imprisonment and three years of suspended execution) sentenced by the court below to the defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested or the person to whom the probation order was requested (hereinafter “defendant”).
3. Determination
A. Each of the instant crimes committed by the Defendant in the instant case is an indecent act committed twice against the victim even though the Defendant knew that the victim was intellectual disability, and thus, is highly likely to be subject to criticism in that he/she committed an indecent act against the disabled person who lacks the ability to defend himself/herself, and the sexual humiliation and mental suffering suffered by the victim seems to have been considerable.
On the other hand, the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case, and has no record of criminal punishment except for those sentenced to a fine due to the violation of the Forestry Act in 2002, and he did not directly agree with the victim, but he paid 30 million won to the father of the victim and made efforts to recover the damage.