【元裁判官が解説】裁判員も目を背けるほど凄惨な暴行の"主犯格"川口侑斗被告（当時18）―焦点は被告の役割と情状面『主犯格だという判断になれば、共犯者と比べてより一層重い判決が出ることが十分予想される』

In 2024, a male university student was gang-raped and killed in a robbery case in a park in Ebetsu City, Hokkaido. On July 13th, the first trial of Yuto Kawaguchi (18 years old at the time of the incident), considered the ringleader, was held. Former judge and current lawyer Kenta Uchida explains the key points for determining the sentence. ■Focus: "Role" and "Arguments for Mitigation" Regarding this case, lawyer Uchida points out, "This is a heinous crime that even the jurors are reluctant to look at, and it has attracted significant social attention. From a legal standpoint, there are many accomplices with diverse roles. Furthermore, the fact that the criminal group includes adults, minors, and specific minors makes the legal judgment quite difficult." Regarding the focus of the trial, he says, "The main issue will be the sentence. Specifically, how important and leading was Kawaguchi's role? Another point of interest will be what will be said regarding mitigating circumstances." In the current trial of defendant Kawaguchi, the defense has stated that "there is no dispute regarding the facts," and argues that "we want people to understand the mitigating circumstances and the background behind them." Regarding the defense's strategy of arguing for mitigating circumstances in sentencing, lawyer Uchida analyzes, "Looking at the objective evidence, it's quite difficult to dispute what actually happened. Therefore, I think they've adopted a strategy of taking what happened as a given and focusing their defense efforts on how the defendant perceived the events—the mitigating circumstances." Specifically, lawyer Uchida says, "For example, there might be certain behavioral characteristics that prevented him from recognizing the seriousness of the situation, or there might be background factors such as abuse that prevented him from making normal decision-making or value judgments. Generally speaking, these are some possibilities." ■ Sentencing Difference with Accomplices Defendant Kawaguchi is considered the "principal perpetrator" of this case and is believed to have actively participated in the assault. Meanwhile, Kawamura Hanon, the defendant alleged to have triggered the incident, received a 30-year prison sentence in June, despite the prosecution's request for life imprisonment. However, both the prosecution and the defense have appealed, and the sentence is not yet final. How will these differences in involvement in the crime affect the verdict? Attorney Uchida explained, "Basically, since this is a case of accomplices, everyone is responsible for what they did, but the importance of their roles is still a factor. There is a hierarchy where those with more significant roles will naturally receive heavier sentences." He then pointed out, "If the trial concludes that she was the principal offender, it is quite possible that she will receive a much harsher sentence compared to the other accomplices." Regarding the fact that Kawamura's sentence is not yet final, he analyzed, "If the sentence had already been finalized, the 30-year prison sentence could have been used as a benchmark, but the court needs to re-examine Kawaguchi's role and characteristics from scratch to determine what kind of sentence is appropriate." ■ How is a "Specified Juvenile" Treated? Kawaguchi was a "specified juvenile" at the time of the incident, being 18 years old. Does being a "specified juvenile" affect the verdict? Attorney Uchida explains, "A 'specified juvenile' is 18 or 19 years old, meaning they are legally adults under civil law, but are still protected as a minor under juvenile law. They are somewhere between a regular minor under 17 and an adult." "Basically, under current law, once indicted, they are treated the same as adults, so there's no justification for easing the sentence just because they're a 'specified juvenile.' However, the fact that they are protected under juvenile law generally means they are still immature and have the potential for rehabilitation, which could be a mitigating factor." He added, "The court needs to carefully consider whether such a heinous act can be explained by immaturity." The verdict for Kawaguchi is scheduled to be handed down on August 7th. *UHB makes individual decisions regarding the use of real names or anonymity for cases involving 18- and 19-year-old "specified juveniles." In this robbery resulting in death case, we have decided to report the names of those involved based on a comprehensive assessment of the severity of the outcome and the social impact on the community.