성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(특수강간)등
All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The victim, consistently from the police to the court of the court below, misunderstanding the Defendants’ innocence portion, ranging from the police to the court of the court below, she met almost under the influence of alcohol from the time when the victim left the drinking house on the day of the instant case to the her mother, caused the victim to find a daily F, and returned to the her motherel, and she returned to the her hold again, and then she cut films after drinking 2 Y. Since the alcohol was broken off, she was in the state where she was out of the clothes and became out of the clothes. At the time, the victim was stated that there was no permission for the victim to have sexual intercourse in sequence.
In addition, Defendant A rejected Defendant A’s confession of the facts charged of special quasi-rape in the original court’s court, the victim’s blood alcohol concentration at the time reaches 0.263%, and the victim’s 2:1 gender relationship proposal.
The victim stated that he was in mind of the sex relationship with Defendant B other than Defendant A who was a partner at the time, or the sex relationship 2:1.
In light of the above facts, it cannot be seen that the victim knew of the fact that there was no Handphone, and the police initial investigation was conducted in the case of larceny. However, it corresponds to the fact that the victim was unable to become aware of sexual assault by drinking alcohol, and that the defendant A had sufficient time for the victim to go out of the body and body at the time of the instant case, and that there was an intentional act by recognizing the victim's status and taking advantage of the victim's intent to have sexual intercourse. In light of the above statement by the victim, it was proved without reasonable doubt that at the time of the instant case, the victim was in a state of loss of body and body or resistance impossible, and that the defendants had the intent to have sexual intercourse by taking advantage of the victim's status.
I would like to say.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants of the charges of special quasi-rape is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The lower court erred in sentencing against Defendant A.