A. misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine) Special intimidation and violation of the Act on the Safety Control of Dangerous Powders, Etc. (crime No. 2-A. 2-a. b. b. as indicated in the judgment below), there was no fact that the Defendant made intimidation (15 years old) by taking advantage of gas guns, which are dangerous objects.

The defendant has no gas gun possession.

2) Regarding the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (compact No. 3 of the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the lower judgment), the Defendant did not have committed rape by exercising the force of force as described in the facts charged in DNA (DVD).

B. The sentencing of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the completion of a sexual assault treatment program for five years and forty hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts or of legal principles, the court below basically held that the victim’s statement can be sufficiently reliable in light of the following circumstances: (a) the victim’s statement is sufficiently reliable in light of the circumstance that the victim made a concrete and consistent statement in an investigative agency and court of the court below as to the background leading up to the crime committed by the Defendant and the victim; (b) the statement and behavior that the Defendant had committed by the victim; and

The decision was determined.

2) 특수 협박 및 총포도 검 화약류 등의 안전관리에 관한 법률 위반의 점과 관련하여, 원심은 피고인이 이 부분 범행 이전에 피해자에게 휴대전화로 가스총과 총알이 찍힌 사진을 전송하면서 ‘ 총으로 쏴 죽인다’, ‘ 실제 총이다’ 라는 메시지를 보냈던 점, 또 가스총을 들고 피해자를 만나러 나온 적도 2회 가량 있으며, 피해자에게 ‘C 쏴 죽일 총’ 이라는 글이 적혀 진 쪽지와 가스총을 함께 촬영한 동영상을 전송하기도 하였던 점 등을 종합하여 볼 때 피고인이 가스총을 들이대며 피해자를 협박하였다는 피해자의 진술에...