beta
(영문) 대구고등법원 2018.01.11 2017노465

강제추행치상등

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

With regard to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), the victim stated consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the court below that the defendant met the victim's face at the date and time as stated in paragraph (1) of the indictment of this case, and at the place of the court of the court below, the defendant and the victim stated that the victim met the victim's body at ordinary times and at the same time, and there is no special relation between the defendant and the victim, and that there is no special relation of relationship between them, the victim means that the defendant knows the face of the defendant and makes a defect in drinking, and that the victim makes a statement that the victim s/he s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/ s/

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict on the charge of the forced indecent act of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

With respect to paragraph (2) of the facts charged, the victim was at the time and the victim at the time.

E consistently from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, the Defendant sought to drink the victim’s face by consistently drinking alcohol at the date and place specified in paragraph 2 of the instant charges, and at the same time and place.

As seen earlier, the Defendant and the victim did not have any special relationship with each other, and the face of a woman is a physical part sufficient to feel a sense of sexual humiliation, and the victim was pushed the victim with his/her intention to become the victim, and the victim did so in the process.

Comprehensively taking account of the consistent statements, the fact that the defendant forcedly commits an indecent act against the victim and thereby sustained injury to the victim is sufficiently recognized.

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not-guilty verdict on the charge of the injury caused by the forced indecent act of this case.