[Missing] ② What kind of punishment did other'Cho Doo-soons' get?

Cho. Doo. Soon.

This name has become synonymous with sex offenders targeting children.

On December 11, 2008, Cho Doo-soon raped an eight-year-old victim and inflicted permanent disability injuries, and the court sentenced him to 12 years in prison.

At the time, the court of the first trial said, "In order to protect the society by preventing the occurrence of additional crimes, and to cultivate and improve the malicious actors, it is necessary to quarantine the society for a long time."

Twelve years have passed since then, and

Cho Doo-soon

finishes his sentence and is released.

Upon release, an electronic anklet is attached and probation is performed for 7 years, and personal information is also disclosed for 5 years.

To the public petition to prevent Cho Doo-soon from being released, the Blue House replied, "It is impossible" and "I will surely prevent Jo Doo-soon from wandering around the victim or potential victim."

The SBS Data Journalism Team [Morning Stance] paid attention to'Cho Doo-soon' other than this Cho Doo-soon.

Sex offenders targeting children and adolescents.

We looked at how many crimes like this have occurred and have been properly punished, and whether the management is doing well after paying the penalty.

The goal of this report was to see if there are many Jo Doo-soons being missed by the symbol of Jo Doo-soon.

The crimes applied to Cho Doo-soon are injuries and injuries such as rape of minors.

Similar to Cho Doo-soon, [Scary] looked at the punishment of sexual offenders who committed rape and similar rape against children and adolescents.

From January 1, 2019 to July 31, 2020, as of the date of sentencing, 300 cases of first trial rulings by national courts for one year and seven months were analyzed.

The crime of adultery for minors was applied here, but some incidents that were similar to rape were included.

Applicable laws include the Criminal Act, the Child and Juvenile Sexual Protection Act, and the Act on Special Cases for Punishment of Sexual Violence.

Of the 300 judgments in total, 298 were sentenced to imprisonment.

Other than that, there was only one fine and one sentencing to the juvenile.

There were 246 imprisonment sentences, accounting for 82.0% of the total.

Four out of five rape or similar rapists targeting children and adolescents were sentenced to imprisonment.

The average sentence was 6 years and 2.2 months.

There were 49 probation (16.3%), and the average sentence was 2 years and 3.7 months in prison and 3 years and 3.9 months probation.

Compared to 2018, the imprisonment rate has increased a little.

According to the '2019 Trends and Trends of Child and Adolescent Sex Offenses' by the Institute for Criminal Policy, analysis of judgments on sexual violence cases against children and adolescents sentenced in 2018 for one year. , The probation of execution was 23.1% for rape and 22.7% for similar rape.

Combined, the sentence was 75.7% imprisoned and 23.1% probation. Compared to 2018, from 2019 to July 2020, the imprisonment rate increased and the probation rate decreased.

The average sentence also increased.

In 2018, the average jail sentence for rape and other jail sentences was 5 years and 3 months, but a sentence was heavier by 9.2 months.

It seems that the punishment of these sex offenders has become more severe than before, as if reflecting the social atmosphere of increasing awareness of sexual crimes against children and adolescents.

Out of 300 cases, 247 cases were ordered to complete the sexual violence treatment program.

The proportion of additional dispositions such as completion of treatment programs was much higher than those who were sentenced to prison alone.

Of the 247 cases, more than half (127 cases) took 40 hours, which means that you only need to complete the basic program for five days on an 8-hour basis.

The number of persons subject to an order to disclose personal information was far fewer than those who completed the treatment program.

Disclosure orders were imposed on 51 cases, 17.0% of the total, and the average period of disclosure was 6 years and 10.4 months.

In 2018, the ratio of persons subject to public order for sexual assault crimes was 11.9%, of which, narrowing down to sexual assault/similar assaults analyzed by [Magic Man], reached 19.9%.

Compared to before, orders for disclosure of personal information have decreased slightly.

The number of instructions for attaching an electronic anklet (position tracking electronic device) decreased further, resulting in 37 cases.

This is only 12.3% of the total.

The average attachment period is 14 years and 1.9 months.

As they are subject to special management, the sentences for these 37 cases were much heavier than the overall average.

The average prison sentence was 6 years and 2.2 months, but 37 cases with electronic anklets were 9 years and 2.3 months on average, about 3 years long.

defendant entered the room where the victim (female, 12 years old) was sleeping in her residence in the winter of 2009, and stopped the victim from moving...

At the same time, they forcibly harassed the victims who were related to them, and engaged in similar sexual acts against minors under the age of 13.

defendant at his residence at the end of August 2014, showing an adult video to the victim (then 12 years old), saying "Let's do it once with dad", and the victim rejecting "no"...

He committed adultery to a victim under the age of 13.

A is a case sentenced in May by Chungju Branch of the Cheongju District Court.

The perpetrator was the victim's real father, who committed several sexual assaults and forced assaults against two real daughters.

The court sentenced the defendant to 12 years in prison and to complete a sexual violence treatment program of 120 hours.

The order to attach electronic anklets was rejected.

B is a case sentenced in August of last year by the Suwon District Court Pyeongtaek Branch, and in this case, the real father committed a crime against his real daughter.

The court in this case also sentenced him to 12 years in prison, but ordered him to wear an electronic anklet for 20 years after he was released.

Both cases were different in the electronic anklet even though the same sentence was sentenced to the judgment given to the father who committed sex crimes against his daughter.

In the case of A, the court rejected the order to attach an electronic anklet, saying that the risk assessment for sexual offenders was'high' but the score was low, and that it was unlikely to commit sexual violence against unspecified victims because it was a crime against victims of their own daughters.

On the other hand, in B, the judiciary committed a crime against the younger than 19 years of age and issued an order to attach it, saying that the crime was recognized more than once, and the victim was also a real daughter, so there is a high risk of recidivism.

The sentence was compared between the group (Y) who received the order to attach an electronic anklet (Y) and the group (N) who did not receive the order to attach an electronic anklet only to cases where prison sentences were sentenced.

Of course, the average was higher in the Y group, but even in the N group, 27 cases were much higher than the average.

Even though the court judged it as a felony crime, it was excluded from attaching electronic anklets. 

Looking at the 27 cases in more detail, there were 8 cases that did not request an order to attach an electronic anklet at all, and 19 cases were made.

Of the 19 cases requested, 17 were dismissed on the grounds that they had no convictions for sexual crimes.

Among the cases that were dismissed, there were nine sex crimes against relatives, such as their own daughter or stepdaughter, as in Cases A and B mentioned above.

All of the rape offenders in these cases committed sexual violence against their daughters, so they were given an electronic anklet indulgence because the risk of committing crimes against an unspecified person was not high. 

were analyzed by subdividing into 30 categories such as father, mother-in-law, relatives, friends, neighbors, and seniors in order to examine the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator in detail.

The result was shocking.

Of the 300 cases of sexual violence, 91.5% of the perpetrators were'knowledgers'.

There were 25 people who did not know anything (unfamiliar people, people I knew through instant meetings, etc.), only 8.1% of the total.

Families and relatives accounted for 37.8%, and 165 people who'know people' who are not related to blood were more than half. 

In the single category, 62 people were known through internet chat, accounting for 20.2% of the total. As pointed out in the previous article, [Stunning], it seems to prove the situation in which children and adolescents are exposed to sexual exploitation through Internet chat. The next most of them were'real father'. All 40 people committed sexual violence against their own daughters. 

There were also differences in sentence depending on the perpetrator. When the sentence was calculated for each victim-perpetrator relationship, the average sentence was highest in the order of real father, mother, and parental friend. All of them were sentenced to more than 115 months in prison and nearly 10 years in prison. The average sentence was also high for stepfathers, teachers, and priests who were responsible for teaching and caring for children.

is'no history of criminal punishment'.'Sentence (量刑)' is the way the court determines the amount of punishment the defendant will receive in criminal trial. The Supreme Court's sentencing committee sets ``sentence standards'' for certain crimes to prevent excessive punishment differences following judges. Currently, the sentence for rape of children and juveniles is a basic sentence of 5 to 8 years in prison and 6 to 9 years in case of aggravation. However, since the sentencing criteria are not legally binding recommendations, there may be cases where reasons different from the sentencing criteria are included for each case. The sentencing committee requires judges to disclose the reasons in the judgment if any other reasons for consideration apply.

[Morning Stance] divided and analyzed the Supreme Court sentencing criteria and the reasons for sentencing frequently mentioned in the ruling. The reasons for weighting were 30 and 24 reasons for reduction.

The reason that appeared most frequently in the aggravated reason was "the victim's physical and mental damage is serious." Out of 300 total, 209 cases appeared. The next was presented in 139 cases as "maintaining the victim's willingness to punish".

The highest number of reasons for the reduction was "there is no history of criminal punishment" (including no history of crimes of the same kind, excess of fines, or excess of probation), and appeared in 76.3% of the total, 229 cases. Next was "repenting or reflecting on the wrong thing." "The victim doesn't want punishment," nearly half came out.

. Based on the reason for the sentence, we checked the conditions that significantly affected the sentence. Multiple regression analysis was used, which is an analysis method used to determine the relationship between several variables. There may be several variables that affect the actual sentence, but [Morning] focused only on the reasons for sentencing and conducted a regression analysis. There were five statistically significant (significance level 0.01) reasons for sentencing.

In the case of aggravated reasons, ① crimes against humanity, ② crimes by the person who should protect the victims, and ③ sadistic/perverted behaviors, or extreme sexual shame were increased. In particular, crimes against humanity had the greatest effect on the sentence, and the average sentence was 68.2% higher than those that did not. It was analyzed that 35.2% of the crimes committed by those who should protect the victims were high, and 30.5% of those who included reasons that increased extreme sexual shame were high.

As for the reasons for reduction, it was analyzed that ① the age was rough and ② the disapproval of punishment had a statistically significant effect. In those cases where the reason for being young was included, the sentence was 39.0% lower than in cases where the sentence was not, and cases that did not want to be punished were 22.4% lower than the rest. 

: simyounggu, baejeonghun, not Heather 

: anjunseok 

: gimjiyeon, yigieun      

▶ [Do trilogy spit] ① 3 1000 people in one year ... Another'Cho Doo-soon' around us