beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.05.31 2018노39

미성년자약취미수등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. As to the summary of the grounds of appeal, the Defendant did not have the intent to capture D, a child, and did not assault C with respect to the part of the bodily injury, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of all the charges of this case. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

2. Determination

A. On May 11, 2017, the summary of this part of the charges is as follows: (a) the Defendant: (b) on May 11, 201, in the Busan Metropolitan Transportation Daegu E 13, 2017, on the part of the Defendant: (c) on the part of the Defendant: (a) on the part of the Defendant: (a) on the part of the Defendant: (a) on the part of the Busan Metropolitan Transportation Daegu E 1st, the Defendant: (b) on the part of the Defendant: (d) on the part of the Victim; (b) on the part of the Defendant: (c) on the part of the Victim; (b) on the part of the Victim C, the Victim C was aware of the Victim D; and (c) on the elevator; and (d) on the part of the Victim C, the Victim C was on the part of the Victim C; and (d) on the part of the Victim C; (b) on the part of the Defendant, the Defendant did not report to the police officer’s attempt to transport the Victim C.

2) The act of kidnapping under Article 287 of the Criminal Act refers to the act of a minor by escaping from the existing life relationship or protection relationship against his will and moving the minor under the control of a criminal or a third party. In the absence of the intent to escape from the existing living relationship and protection relationship, it is difficult to recognize the commencement of the commission of the crime (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do8485, Jan. 17, 2008). In light of the above legal principles, in full view of the following facts acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the defendant tried to communicate with C, but C attempted to talk with C.