logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2015.05.14 2015노65
성폭력범죄의처벌및피해자보호등에관한법률위반(강간등상해)등
Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1’s part of the Defendant’s case (A) The lower court and the person requesting an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) are limited to the Defendant and the person requesting the attachment order.

(B) It is unreasonable for the court below to order the defendant to disclose and notify personal information for 7 years, even though there are special circumstances that the defendant would not disclose or notify the personal information to the improper defendant of the order to disclose or notify the personal information (7 years of imprisonment). 2) It is improper for the court below to order the defendant to attach a location tracking device to the defendant although the defendant does not pose a risk of repeating sexual crimes.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination on the part of the defendant's case

A. In full view of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant’s crime of determining unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the Prosecutor was planned, repeated, and seriously infringed upon the peace of residence; (b) the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes against unspecified victims by exercising a strong tangible power or in a virtual method; (c) the physical and mental suffering of victims of the instant case appears to be difficult to be easily cured; (d) the victims’ age and character, character and environment; (e) the background of each of the instant crimes; and (e) other various sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct; (e) the background of each of the instant crimes; and (e) the circumstances after the instant crimes, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too heavy or unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant and prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing is rejected.

B. As to the Defendant’s unreasonable assertion of disclosure order, Article 2 of the Addenda to the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc.”) and the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes) are to be sought.

arrow