아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강요행위등)등
All parts of the judgment of the court below against the defendant shall be reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.
Seized SY.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (trade)
A) There was no fact that the Defendant traded. The Defendant did not intend to jointly process and did not have functional control over this part of the crime, and thus, the Defendant is not liable as a co-principal. Nevertheless, the first instance court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. (2) Although there was a misunderstanding of facts with the victim about the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, the Defendant did not have sexual intercourse by force with the victim.
Nevertheless, the first instance court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
3) The Defendant did not commit any act of similarity by assaulting or threatening a victim to commit a violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse. Nevertheless, the first instance court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. (B) The lower court’s sentence that the lower court rendered against the Defendant (the first instance court: five years of imprisonment, and the second instance court’s imprisonment, August 2, 201, too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio shall be examined ex officio.
The defendant filed an appeal against the first and second original judgment, respectively, and this court held a joint trial on each of the above appeals cases.
Each offense of the lower judgment against the Defendant is concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.