beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 진주지원 2017.05.16 2016고합105

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자강제추행)

Text

The accused shall announce the summary of the judgment of innocence.

Reasons

1. On January 10, 2016, the Defendant: (a) reported at “E” restaurant located in Jinju-si, Jinju-si, about 22:00, that the victim F (at that time, 6 years of age) is together with G, the mother of the victim; (b) had the victim forcedly committed an indecent act against the victim; (c) had the victim saber sburg; and (d) had the victim saber sburd sburd sburd sburds on the right side of the Defendant, who

The phrase "I am the victim's head at least three times and rhh with his/her shoulder as aground, and am the victim am aground, and the ambling victim called "I am well" and the victim am aground and ambling the victim's right chest by inserting his/her left hand into the neck in which the victim suffered.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against a minor who is under 13 years of age.

2. Determination

A. Although the Defendant’s assertion was rhyd with the victim’s hair and shoulder as they are rhyd, the Defendant’s assertion was not written as if the victim’s chest were taken by putting the victim’s hair into the victim’s gate, and the Defendant’s rhythizing the victim’s hair and shoulder did not constitute an indecent act but did not intend to commit an indecent act.

argument is asserted.

B. (1) The relevant legal doctrine refers to an act that objectively causes a sense of sexual humiliation or aversion to the general average person in the same place as the victim and violates good sexual morality, and thus infringes on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether it constitutes such an act ought to be determined by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship between the offender and the victim, circumstances leading to the act, specific manner leading to the act, the form of the act committed against the victim, the objective situation surrounding the act, and the sexual moral sense of that time (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do13716, Feb. 25, 2010; 2012Do936, Mar. 29, 2012).