logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.01.08 2014노1675
아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강요행위등)등
Text

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the Defendants and the judgment of the court of second instance are reversed.

2. Three years of imprisonment for Defendant A.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

The punishment of the lower court against A (the first instance court, the second instance court, and the second instance court) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

B The judgment of the court of first instance that found the Defendant guilty of the charge of violating the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, even though the Defendant did not have had the victim F by threatening the victim F to engage in sexual traffic, and even if the victim voluntarily engaged in sexual traffic, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

The first instance court's punishment [the imprisonment with prison labor for a maximum of 10 months, the short-term of 8 months, the imprisonment with prison labor for the remaining crimes, the short-term of 2 years, and the short-term of 1 year and 6 months] against the defendant claiming unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

Defendant

C. The judgment of the court of first instance that found the Defendant guilty of the charges concerning the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Coercive Conduct, etc.) against the Defendant C, even though the Defendant did not have had the victim F by threateninging the victim F to engage in sexual traffic, and the victim voluntarily committed sexual traffic.

The first instance court's punishment (two years of imprisonment for a maximum term, one year and six months) against the defendant claiming unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.

Judgment

Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendants ex officio, the prosecutor will examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendants, and at the court of first instance, the facts charged against the Defendants in violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Coercive Conduct) concerning the first instance court's 2013 Gohap19.

paragraphs (c) through (c).

Article 11(1)1 and 3 of the former Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 11572, Dec. 18, 2012; hereinafter the same shall apply), etc., and for Defendant B and C, respectively.

arrow