성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(친족관계에의한강간)
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts by both parties
A. On May 28, 2016, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by misunderstanding the facts, even though the Defendant merely engaged in a sexual intercourse with the victim and did not exercise force, on or around May 28, 2016.
The argument is asserted.
The court below judged that the physical force of the defendant exercised by the victim is sufficient to suppress the victim's free will and found guilty of this part of the facts charged in light of the fact that the victim, who is merely 14 years of age, did not seem to have complied with the defendant's request for a sudden sexual relation without any reason, and the relation and age of the victim and the defendant, place of crime, circumstances, etc.
Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in comparison with the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court’s determination on this part is justifiable, and there were errors in the misapprehension of the facts as to the exercise of power
subsection (b) of this section.
B. On May 28, 2016, the prosecutor’s assertion 1 of the facts charged was determined as follows: (a) the prosecutor’s prosecutor’s determination of the allegations regarding the crime committed around May 28, 2016 among the primary facts charged; and (b) the Defendant was found to have sexual intercourse with the victim by exercising the victim’s power of force to the extent that the victim’s resistance is impossible or considerably difficult
The argument is asserted.
As to this part of the facts charged, the lower court held that the Defendant exercised a tangible power to the extent that it is impossible or considerably difficult for the Defendant to resist beyond the exercise of force sufficient to suppress the victim’s free will, on the grounds of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant was not at the time of or threatening the victim on May 28, 2016, and the victim’s shoulder or hand was lying on the victim’s shoulder and hand, and only took part in the damaged person’s force; and (b) the Defendant was able to resist the victim’s free will
It is difficult to conclude.