beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 (춘천) 2018.07.18 2018노26

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(강간등상해)등

Text

Defendant

All appeals filed by A, C, and D and the Prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

Reasons

As to the summary of the grounds for appeal, Defendant A- of fact mistake and misunderstanding of the legal principles, the Defendant did not have received the passbook from the victim by deceiving the victim to enter the supply fee.

① The statement by the victim concerning the person to whom the passbook was issued, is not consistent to the statement made by the victim on the grounds that the statement made by the victim about the person to whom the passbook was issued, was obtained through deception of the passbook from the defendant, cannot be believed. ② around August 2016, the victim left the passbook to the defendant because it is uneasy for the victim to leave the passbook at the room of 304, and the defendant did not receive the money by deceiving the victim and deliver it. ③ Although the defendant had withdrawn money from the passbook, the defendant was withdrawn on behalf of the victim upon request by the victim, but the money so withdrawn was used by the victim for his own account, and ④ the money so withdrawn was withdrawn.

at all times the defendant has withdrawn.

It shall not be readily concluded.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

As to the violation of the Act on the Punishment of Acts, such as the Mediation, etc. of Commercial Sex Acts and the Act on the Regulation of Customs and Business, the defendant did not have arranged commercial sex acts in the "K" operated by the defendant.

① The Defendant’s statement regarding the Defendant’s act of arranging sexual traffic is not consistent and cannot be trusted. ② L and D, on January 21, 2017, did not immediately have a place of business with male and moved to a lodging establishment after having a meal at a booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming booming bat bat bat bat bats

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found this part of the facts charged is erroneous.