강제추행
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the grounds that the defendant, inasmuch as he did not deprive the victim of clothes to help the victim out of the clothes or by compulsion of indecent act.
2. Determination
A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the victim stated that the victim made a mistake of facts that the victim had not sealed the victim in both arms after and after the victim's use of the part of the victim's body, and that the victim's use of the part of the victim's body was forced by force by force.
As acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant stated that ① the victim's statement is consistent with the victim's investigative agency and the court below's statement, ② the defendant also committed an indecent act against the victim, immediately after the victim's statement was deducted from the victim's appearance (p.107 of investigation records). The victim's behavior appears to have shown considerable rejection to the defendant's behavior at the time of the defendant's action (p.107). ③ The defendant was the victim prior to the crime of this case, and ③ even though the victim did not talk with the victim, he did not talk with each other, even though he did not talk about the victim's face, it can be acknowledged that the defendant committed an indecent act against the victim. Thus, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is not accepted.
B. As to the grounds that affect the judgment, the court of appeal ex officio may decide ex officio on the grounds that are not included in the statement of grounds for appeal (Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act), and where the defendant appealed only on the grounds of mistake of facts, the appellate court ex officio reverses the judgment of the first instance on the grounds of unfair sentencing and determines a minor sentence than
(See Supreme Court Decision 90Do1021 delivered on September 11, 1990. Regarding the instant case, health care units and the Defendant’s indecent act against the victim are not provided for by the crime. However, the Defendant’s primary crime without any previous criminal record is the Defendant’s motive for committing the crime.