성폭력범죄의처벌및피해자보호등에관한법률위반(특수강간)
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.
The defendants are every 80 hours.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A1) At the time of misunderstanding the facts, the Defendant, under the agreement with the victim K and paid KRW 30,00 in return for the sexual intercourse. However, there is no fact that Co-Defendant and the victims conspired to rape, and that there was no fact that the victims forced or forced to commit rape. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing is too unreasonable.
B. Defendant C1) misunderstanding of facts: (a) Defendant 2 was released out of Mamoel 209 to Mamoel 209; (b) Defendant 2 was provided with two male members with sexual intercourses from the victimJ; (c) Defendant B and A did not have any sexual intercourses with the victim K; and (d) there was no conspiracy to commit rapes with the co-defendants. (b) The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.
C. Defendant B’s punishment is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. 1) In determining the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court of the relevant legal doctrine (1) shall not reject the statements without permission, unless there are any other reliable data to deem that the statements made by the witness, including the victim, etc., are consistent with the rationality, logic, and morality of the contents of the statements themselves, or with the rule of experience, or are consistent with the witness evidence or a third party’s statement in the open court after taking an oath before the judge, and the appearance or attitude of the witness, and the penance of the statements, etc., which are difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, by directly observing the various circumstances that are difficult to record. The credibility of the statements made by the witness, including the victim, are assessed, and the statements made by the witness, including the victim, are consistent and consistent with the facts charged (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012).