beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.10.10 2017가단219750

손해배상(기)

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,000,000 and its related amount are 5% per annum from October 31, 2016 to October 10, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are between the workplace’s ship and the post-ship that they came to know while serving in CD, a security screening company.

B. The Defendant was charged with rape and violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., and was sentenced to a four-year imprisonment on August 23, 2017 by the Incheon District Court 2017 Manhap114, and appealed as Seoul High Court 2017No2678.

On March 13, 2018, the appellate court reversed ex officio the judgment of the first instance on the grounds of changes in indictment and sentenced the defendant to four years by recognizing the following criminal facts:

In other words, the defendant appealed to Supreme Court Decision 2018Do4968 Decided May 30, 2018 and the judgment of the appellate court became final and conclusive.

The defendant (the defendant of this case) allowed the victim (the plaintiff of this case; hereinafter the same shall apply) to be exempted from the water so that he could not resist the victim by reing the victim, and tried to rape the victim. On October 31, 2016, around 11:40, in the frequency of the location of Jung-gu, Incheon, Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Incheon, the defendant allowed the victim to drink with the victim and drink the victim with the exemption from water according to the method of mixing the victim's alcohol with water exemption. At the same time, the defendant exceeded the clothes of the victim who was unable to resist due to the influence of the exemption from water, and raped the victim by inserting the victim's sexual organ into the part of the part of the victim.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Evidence Nos. 4-1, 2, and 5-1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts finding that the Defendant committed rape on October 31, 2016, and the fact that the Plaintiff was suffering from severe mental pain is apparent in light of the empirical rule, and thus, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff emotional distress in money.

The defendant has a sexual relationship with the plaintiff by inducing the defendant.