logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2014.12.04 2014노1311
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The main point of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) the lower court’s sentence is deemed unhued and unreasonable.

On the other hand, although subparagraph 1 of the seizure of this case is an object of confiscation, it is erroneous for the court below to omit the order of confiscation.

2. Determination

A. The instant crime on the assertion of unfair sentencing cannot be deemed as having taken the image of a woman who considers a change in appearance in toilets on two occasions, and the nature of the crime cannot be deemed to be negligible.

However, considering the following facts: (a) the Defendant led to the confession of and his depth in committing an offense; (b) the Defendant agreed with the victim in the original instance; (c) there was no power to commit an offense; and (d) the motive and background of the offense; (b) the circumstances after the commission of the offense; (c) the Defendant’s age, career, and environment; and (d) all the sentencing conditions indicated in the records

B. As the confiscation under Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act, the judgment on the assertion of confiscation is discretionary, the issue of whether to confiscate even an article that meets the requirement of confiscation is left to the court's discretion, except for the restriction by the proportionality principle applied to the general penal law.

(2) In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the court below’s decision that did not render a sentence of forfeiture on the ground that there is no need for forfeiture, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to forfeiture or by abusing discretionary power, in light of the following: (a) the mobile phone of the Defendant used in the photographing of the instant videos (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Do15805, May 24, 2013).

3. In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit and it is so decided as per Disposition in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

arrow