성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자강제추행)등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles with regard to the summary of the grounds for appeal (not guilty part): In light of the fact that the Defendant brought the hives in front of the victim with the hives kept in his house, and shows the victim the hives of the hives as well as whether the Defendant was selected in the facts charged that are suitable for the hives of the hives, it can be recognized that the Defendant possessed the hives following the intent to use the hives
However, the court below did not recognize it and judged not guilty on this part of the charges concerning the crime of bodily injury to the defendant's carrying with a deadly weapon, which is in accordance with mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles and must be corrected.
2. As to this part of the facts charged concerning the crime of bodily injury with a deadly weapon, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground that it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant had the intent to use a dangerous object at the time when the Defendant started the crime of bodily injury to the victim or carried it with the intent to possess it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, on the ground that there is no other evidence to prove it.
Examining the grounds for appeal as alleged by the prosecutor in light of the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court’s determination that the Defendant did not have any intention to use the decline mons any longer at the time of injury to the victim’s Paris bonds chosen by the victim is sufficiently acceptable.
Furthermore, in a specific case, whether a certain thing constitutes a “hazardous thing” under Article 258-2(1) of the Criminal Act shall be determined depending on whether the other party or a third party could feel a danger to life or body when using the thing in light of social norms.