beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2016.06.15 2016노235

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(공중밀집장소에서의추행)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal does not contain any fact that the Defendant intentionally seated adjacent to the bus, as stated in the facts charged, caused the victim’s right buckbucks, and thus, the lower court convicted the Defendant otherwise.

2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, it is sufficient to find the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is justified, and the defendant's assertion is without merit.

A. The victim at the investigative agency and the court of the court below, “The Defendant had left bucks in the right buckbucks, and entered bucks at the time, and the Defendant had contacted the bucks at the time.

“When bucks are leaked, she shall not talk with the Defendant, and she shall not talk with the Defendant, and she shall be referred to as “I ambbbbbbbs.”

“At the same time, the Defendant talked as she seems to do so, and the Defendant did not listen to the speech while she sees the snow.

Specific and consistent statement is made on the background of the indecent act in question, the situation before and after the prosecution, and the circumstances that led to the conviction of an intentional indecent act not in value, etc.

B. The victim moved to the back of the Defendant immediately after the prosecution. The victim sent the H message called “Ibbucks,” “I am bucks, I am bucks, I am bucks, I am bucks, I am bucks (53 page of the evidence record).”

(c)

At the time of the instant case, a passenger was on board the bus

E, F, and G do not directly witness the indecent act situation, but immediately after the indecent act in the court of the court below, the injured person has moved the defendant to the back of the damage, and the victim has made a biological statement about the indecent act against the defendant.

(d)

Although it is objectively apparent that the defendant made a call to his wife after the bus board, the victim does not have the permanent domicile or commits an indecent act against the defendant in CCTV inside the bus.