The number of crimes in which the result of the injury resulting from the rape of several times has occurred;

In the case of bodily injury resulting from rape in several times, the crime of bodily injury resulting from rape is not established according to the frequency of rape, but only one crime of bodily injury resulting from rape is established by combining a series of acts.

Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 301 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 1 and two others

Busan District Court Msan Branch Court (80 High 207)

Of the judgment of the court below, the part on Defendant 1 is reversed.

Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for a short term of three years and six months, and a long term of four years.

One hundred and twenty-five days of detention days prior to the sentence of the original judgment shall be included in the above sentence.

All appeals by Defendant 2 and 3 are dismissed.

The number of days under detention prior to the rendering of a judgment shall be 80 days each from among the days under detention prior to the rendering of a judgment, and such days shall be included in the sentence of the original judgment.

The gist of Defendant 1’s appeal No. 1 is that the court below erred by misunderstanding facts as to the injury from rape since the Defendant did not commit the crime causing rape, and that the court below’s appeal Nos. 2, 2, 3, etc. and the summary of the grounds for appeal by the public defender of the Defendant, etc. is too unreasonable.

First of all, considering the evidence examined and adopted by the court below as to the defendant 1's assertion of mistake of facts, it is sufficient to acknowledge the criminal facts of the defendant, and there is no other evidence to see that the court below erred in the fact-finding of the defendant.

However, according to the judgment below and the facts of finding it ex officio, the court below held that Defendant 1, as stated in the judgment of the court below, committed rape on April 21, 1980 between 00 and 24:00 on April 29, 1980 and 24:0 on April 29, 1980, and caused the victim's bodily injury, etc. caused by rape during four times and the victim caused the bodily injury, etc. caused by rape. However, if the result was caused by multiple rapes, it is reasonable to view that the crime of rape is not established according to the recovery of rape, and only one crime of bodily injury resulting from rape is established by including the series of acts, and therefore, it is reasonable to view that the judgment of the court below against the defendant 1 erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the crime of bodily injury resulting from rape, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, the judgment of the court below against the defendant cannot be reversed without any necessary judgment as to the remainder of the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

Therefore, pursuant to Article 364(2) and (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the part against Defendant 1 among the judgment below is reversed, and the judgment is rendered again after pleading.

The relationship between Defendant 1’s criminal facts recognized as a party member and the evidence thereof is the same as that of the lower court, and thus, they are quoted as it is.

Article 2(2) and (1) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 366 of the Criminal Act, Article 314 of the Criminal Act, Article 3(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, Article 2(2) of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 2(2) and Article 283(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 2 of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act, Article 3(2) and Article 283(2) of the Criminal Act, Article 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 2(2) and (1) of the Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 3 of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 260(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 3 of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act, Article 301 and Article 297 of the Criminal Act, Article 4 of the Criminal Act, which provides for the punishment of injury resulting from rape of a defendant during the period of punishment of imprisonment of imprisonment, Article 2 of the Act.

Next, in light of the following circumstances as to the grounds of appeal by Defendants 2 and 3, such as the age, character and conduct, intelligence, environment, motive, means, result and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentencing of the court below is reasonable and too unreasonable.

However, according to the judgment of the court below, although there is a defect in applying Article 57 of the Juvenile Act to the inclusion of the number of days of pre-trial detention to the same defendant, it cannot be viewed that it was a clerical error in Article 57 of the Criminal Act and that it affected the judgment, the judgment of the court below cannot be reversed only on the ground that this is

Therefore, the judgment of the court below against the defendant 2, 3 is just, and since the appeal by the same defendant is groundless, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and 80 days of detention prior to the sentencing of this case shall be included in the sentence of the court below against the same defendant under Article 57 of the Criminal Act.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Yoon Young (Presiding Judge) Lee (Presiding Judge)