아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강제추행)
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. According to a misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles, according to CCTV images, it can be confirmed that the Defendant did not attack the victim’s sexual organ, or that the victim’s sexual organ was not raised, and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the victim’s statement lacks credibility, is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Defendant was imprisoned with the victim’s sexual organ, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, but erred
B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the amount of KRW 7 million, the amount of KRW 40 million, and the amount of 40 hours, etc.) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles, the lower court determined that, in full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the Defendant committed an indecent act by force against the victim as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the lower judgment.
① The victim, at the investigative agency, she was "the defendant was "the second grade in the elevator," and she respondeded to "the defendant was "the defendant," and she was "the defendant was the first and third grade," and she was "the 1st grade in the United Nations large and third grade," and she was "the she was the her sexual organ on his/her hand," and she was the her own sexual organ.
“The statement was made”.
The above statements by the victim are specific and natural so that credibility exists.
The decision is judged.
② According to CCTV images, it is confirmed that the Defendant is aware of a little body by dividing the conversation with the victim, and the part of the victim’s sexual organ is protruding back.
(3) The defendant is not memoryd in one-time investigation by the police.
After considering CCTV images, it is recognized that the CCTV is part of the victim's sexual organ, and it is not recognized that it is part of the victim's sexual organ.
The defendant made a statement in the court of original instance, and the defendant made the victim a crypt.