강제추행
All appeals by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The defense counsel (misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine) did not make any resistance against the victim F while the defendant raises the victim F one to two minutes.
Defendant with the consent of the victim
In addition, there was no intention to commit a crime, and there was no use of force against the victim's will.
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged on the grounds of the statement of the victim F, etc. without credibility, thereby misunderstanding the facts or misapprehending the legal doctrine on indecent acts committed by force, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The Defendant committed the instant crime under the influence of alcohol to the victim, who is an employee of the real estate brokerage office operated by himself, and the nature of the crime is not good. The Defendant, after the occurrence of the instant case, had the victim work in another office against his will, and had the victim testifyed in the court below to the victim by denying the crime, thereby causing secondary damage to the victim. After the occurrence of the instant case, the Defendant showed the victim’s attitude that he had expressed that he was aware that he was guilty of committing the instant crime by stating that “the victim was fluoring alcohol and fluoring him,” and that “the victim was fluoring the alcohol” after the occurrence of the instant case. However
In light of the fact that the victim asserts that he was not liable to the victim, and that the victim was severely punished by the defendant, etc., the sentence of the court below which sentenced the order to complete the sexual assault treatment program program for 5 million won and 24 hours is too uncomfortable and unfair.
2. Determination
A. (1) In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the victim F’s statement was credibility.
Recognizing the above facts charged by the Defendant in full view of the victim F’s statements and text messages.