logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2013.05.03 2013노580
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자강제추행)등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The judgment below

Of the "order", 40 hours for the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentence on the part of the Defendant case is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. It is unreasonable to dismiss the request for the attachment order of this case even if the defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (hereinafter “defendant”) are found to pose a risk of repeating a sexual crime.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the fact that the defendant in the part of the defendant's case is against the crime in this case, the defendant's age, character and conduct, family environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, means and method of the crime, circumstances before and after the crime, etc., various sentencing conditions as shown in the argument in this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, family environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, method and method of the crime, and the recommended sentencing guidelines of the Supreme Court, it is not recognized that the court below's punishment is too un

B. According to Article 9(4)4 of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders, a request for an attachment order shall be dismissed when a suspended sentence is imposed on a specific crime case. As seen above, the lower court’s sentencing that sentenced the suspended sentence against the Defendant is unreasonable. Thus, the Prosecutor’s assertion on this part is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act and Article 35 of the Act on Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders on the ground that it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

However, the judgment below’s order for the completion of the sexual assault treatment program is clearly stated in the text of the judgment below, that “the completion of the sexual assault treatment program” is an order for the completion of the sexual assault treatment program, and that “the completion order” in the application of the statutes is each clerical error in the lecture order, and such correction is corrected as it is in accordance with Article

arrow