아동학대범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(아동복지시설종사자등의아동학대가중처벌)
All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The sentence of the lower court (two years of suspended sentence in October, 200, 40 hours of lectures to prevent child abuse, and 1 year of restrictions on employment of child-related institutions) is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (not guilty part) ① The point of abuse against the victim B who was acquitted by the lower court on July 11, 2017 as to the judgment of the lower court was an act of physical and emotional abuse of the said victim, but the lower court did not constitute such act, and thus, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the charges. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending of facts and misapprehending of legal principles. ② The part of the lower court’s negligence outside the classroom out of the abuse of the victim B, which was found not innocent by the lower court on July 12, 2017 and July 13, 2017 (hereinafter “each part of the instant neglect”).
) The part of the facts charged which the court below found guilty as having relation to the above facts charged and found out of the class among the above facts charged (hereinafter “each guilty part of this case”).
Since a series of abuse connected to the above, only each part of the left parts of this case should not be separately removed and determined in a stimulative manner. Nevertheless, the lower court separately determined each of the parts of this case’s leaving alone and found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged, so the lower court erred by misunderstanding of facts and misapprehending of legal principles. 2) The lower court’s punishment is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles
A. The lower court’s judgment on July 11, 2017, as to the victim B’s abuse on July 11, 2017, on the part that the Defendant did not take any specific measures for ten minutes against the victim, the lower court first determined as follows: (a) according to video CD, the following facts are: (b) the date and time indicated in the facts charged was time for children, and some children were actually at low diving; and (b) the victim was seated on the bit lease, and the Defendant was about 1m in the same space as the victim.