logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.08.18 2016노1235
아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(위계등간음)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Sexual assault against the defendant for forty hours.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s sentencing is too unreasonable for the Defendant and the person who requested the attachment order.

B. Prosecutor 1) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2) Although the court below was found to have committed a sexual crime against a person under the age of 19 and the person to whom the attachment order was improper and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter the defendant) committed a sex crime, it is improper to dismiss the request for the attachment order of this case.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant committed the instant crime in the part of the instant case against the Defendant at the same time by forcing the Defendant to perform an unobligatory act by threatening the victim G, who is a child or juvenile, and engaged in sexual abuse, such as sexual harassment, etc., and allowing the Defendant to reach the victim G by means of communications media for the purpose of meeting his/her own sexual desire and causing sexual humiliation or aversion, and by force into the victim G’s sexual organ, causing sexual intercourse, threatening the victim K, who is a child or juvenile, to perform a non-obligatory act, and taking into account the victim G and K’s age, strict punishment against the Defendant is necessary.

However, if considering the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and other conditions of sentencing specified in the argument of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, motive, means and consequence of the crime, the court below's punishment is too unreasonable, so the defendant's above assertion is justified, and the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.

B. We examine ex officio prior to the determination of the prosecutor’s wrongful assertion regarding the attachment order for the part of the case.

Article 9(5) of the Act on the Protection and Observation of Specific Criminal Offenders and Electronic Monitoring, Etc. (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on the Attachment of Electronic Devices").

arrow