성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(강간등치상)등
All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
1. Regarding the summary of the Defendants’ grounds of appeal, with regard to joint indecent acts by compulsion, the Defendants were able to have a physical contact with the victim in the process of leaving the victim's clothes or opening the back of the vehicle in front of the victim, on the ground that the Defendants, at the time of the instant case, moved along with the victim’s dialogue with the victim and got the victim into the vehicle with drinking time, and the victim was able to get out of the vehicle with the victim’s mind by changing the victim’s mind, and the victim’s back door of the vehicle opened by the Defendant B is likely to suffer from or fall into the accident, with the victim’s left hand. However, the Defendants did not have committed an indecent act by force, and the statement of the victim is not consistent, and thus, it is erroneous that the lower court found the Defendants guilty of this part of the facts charged.
2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined in the court below: ① the victim made a consistent statement from the investigative agency to the court below to the effect that he was forced to put himself into the vehicle; according to the record of evidence on the conversation between the Defendants and the victim within the vehicle below the 96th page of the record of the record of evidence No. 96, the victim’s conversation between the Defendants and the victim, and later, the victim called the victim from the vehicle at the seat of the 155 and 164 of the record of the defendant A public trial, and the victim called the victim from the vehicle at the seat of the 155 and 164, and it is difficult for the victim to get on his own at least 4 cc prior to the new wall, and the victim’s first boarding of the vehicle at around 4 cc prior to the above order is highly likely to be an indecent act by the Defendants by force, but it is not consistent with the victim’s statement.