beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.10.12 2017고단1140

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 31, 2016, the Defendant tried to photograph the screen picture of the Defendant’s cell phone D (the age of 22) with the cell phone camera in which the Defendant’s cell phone is cut off from the left column of the shower room ‘C’ at the point of the Defendant’s operation of the Defendant in Ttia B’ on May 31, 2016.

As a result, the Defendant tried to take photographs of the body of the victim who could cause sexual humiliation or shame, using a camera or other similar mechanism, against his will. However, the Defendant attempted to take photographs of the victim’s body, but did not take photographs of the victim’s body.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of the witness D;

1. E statements;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of a report on results of digital evidence analysis), and report on results of digital evidence analysis;

1. The records of seizure and the list of seizure [each statement made by the victim's investigative agency and this court shall be recognized as credibility in light of the contents of the witness given at the time by the victim, the defendant's act, the fear and response of the victim, the situation before and after the crime, and the circumstances where the false statement is not visible, and the defendant's cell phone phone phone image files recorded at the time of the crime in this case are objectively recognized to exist and deleted, and the victim's statement in this court shall be acknowledged as credibility.

Although there is any inconsistency with the facts objectively recognized in the victim’s statement regarding the number of video files deleted from the Defendant’s mobile phone or the time when the video files are deleted, this is deemed to be due to the limitation of the victim’s memory according to the victim’s appraisal, such as cruelness, etc., and due to the lapse of time, and is not enough to suspect the credibility of the victim’s statement.

In addition, according to the statements of one victim, it is recognized that the victim's body, who was shower by the defendant, was faced with his cell phone camera.