강간상해등
Of the acquittal portion of the lower judgment, intimidation shall be reversed.
Of the facts charged in the instant case, intimidation is acquitted.
1. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of rape and bodily injury included in the facts charged of rape injury, and ② confinement.
③ The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of intimidation, special intimidation, and found the Defendant not guilty of the injury by rape.
The gist of appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is as follows.
Defendant
1) ① The Defendant did not engage in rape while making a victim unable to resist at a hotel. The victim’s statement that corresponds to this part of the facts charged is difficult to believe. ② At the time of sexual intercourse, the Defendant did not exercise a tangible power to make it impossible or considerably difficult to resist the victim at the time of sexual intercourse, and there is also a proximate causal relation between the Defendant’s assault, threat, and sexual intercourse. ③ Confinement is accompanied by the assault process, and it is difficult to deem that the Defendant detained the victim separately from the assault. In other words, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the confinement of rape among the convicted parts of the lower judgment that otherwise determined, and there was an error of mistake regarding the charge of rape. (ii) The lower court’s punishment (three years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable
B. A prosecutor (1) A victim’s statement that conforms to the crime of intimidation, special intimidation may be trusted. ② In light of the background leading up to the Defendant’s assault and rape, degree and time of assault, and the part and degree of the victim’s injury, etc., the Defendant should be deemed to have inflicted an injury on the opportunity to rape the victim (including the part of acquittal in the grounds for rape). In other words, the part of the lower judgment that determined otherwise was acquitted (including the part of acquittal in the grounds for rape) is erroneous. 2) The sentence of the lower court is too unreasonable.
2. The victim’s statement is not sufficient to prove that there is a direct evidence that can be found guilty of this part of the facts charged.
The court below, on the basis of various circumstances, has rendered a "victim".