아동복지법위반(아동학대)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of seven million won.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant: Error of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, misunderstanding of facts, and misunderstanding of legal principles are not consistent, and they cannot be reliable because they do not conform to objective circumstances. The lower court acknowledged that Defendant committed physical abuse, emotional abuse, and neglect to the victimized children as stated in the annexed crime list (except No. 17) of the lower judgment on the basis of the statements made by the victims without credibility. In so doing, the lower court erred by misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles on the guilty portion of the lower judgment, and misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles. 2. The lower court’s sentence (excluding 7 million won of fine) is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor: Compared to the Defendant, the victim E of mistake of mistake of unfair sentencing and mistake of facts in the original trial court on July 2013, 2013.
“The above testimony was made,” while the above testimony was reliable, the court below recognized that the facts charged as stated in No. 17 No. 17 of the annexed list of crime committed by the victim E alone such as the victim E’s statement cannot be deemed to have been proven. The judgment of the court below was erroneous in the misconception of facts.
2 The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. Ex officio determination
A. In the trial of the court, the prosecutor ex officio reasons for the reversal of the indictment of this case filed an application for the modification of the indictment with the content of the attached list of crimes in this case (hereinafter “crime list”) as stated in the annexed list of crimes in this judgment, and the name of the crime was changed to “child Welfare Violation (Child Abuse) and Child Welfare Violation (Child Abuse)” and the judgment of the court was changed to the subject of the judgment in this case.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.
However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of mistake and misapprehension of legal principles and the prosecutor's assertion of mistake is still changed.