강제추행등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant: misunderstanding of legal principles and unreasonable sentencing;
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. Regarding the misapprehension of the legal principle, the following facts are comprehensively examined: (a) the Defendant’s average amount of mental disorder duly admitted and investigated by various evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court; (b) the amount of drinking prior to the instant crime; (c) the background leading up to the instant crime; (d) the means and method; (c) the Defendant’s act (in particular, the form of the Defendant expressed in CCTV images taken at the time of the instant crime); and (d) the circumstances before and after the instant crime, even though the Defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime, it was recognized that the Defendant was in a state of drinking alcohol at the time of the instant crime, and thus, the Defendant was unable
or lack of such capacity. It does not appear that the institution was in a state of lacking capacity.
(2) According to the records of this case as to whether a mental disorder occurred due to mental illness, the defendant, as North Korean defectors, entered Korea in 2004, and from around December 2007, the counseling center at the Student Welfare Center at the student welfare center at the school of the former generation, which had been in his school from around December, 2007, complaining of the difficulties in responding to university life such as depression, apprehensions, ineasia, ineassury, insury, insurgy, damage consciousness, and insurgy, is recognized as the fact that the symptoms of the "Ex Post Facto Experience
However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the following facts are revealed: (a) the method and method of the crime in this case; (b) the defendant's behavior before and after the crime; (c) the circumstances before and after the crime; and (d) the defendant's common drinking at a regrative place prior to and after the crime; and (c) it seems that there was no particular obstacle to communicating with others before and after the crime; and (d) the defendant's medical history