beta
(영문) 부산지방법원 2016.06.24 2015노3431

강제추행등

Text

All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, although the defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The punishment of the lower judgment that was unfair in sentencing (the amount of KRW 5 million, the amount of KRW 40 hours, the amount of KRW 5 million, the amount of KRW 40 hours) is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The Criminal Procedure Act of Korea adopts the principle of public trial-oriented that the establishment of a conviction or innocence against the substance of a criminal case ought to be based on a trial-oriented principle, and adopts a substantial direct psychological principle that only the evidence directly examined in the presence of a judge can be used as the basis of a trial and the original evidence near the facts to be proved should be based on a trial-oriented principle, and that the use of substitute documents for the original evidence should not be permitted in principle. This is intended to enable a judge to form a new and accurate conviction on the case through the method of investigating the original evidence directly in a court, while giving a defendant an opportunity to directly state his/her opinion on the original evidence, thereby enabling the discovery of substantial truth and realizing a fair trial.

Therefore, the court presiding over the criminal procedure should be able to realize the above substantial and complete spirit of the principle of direct deliberation in the first instance trial court, which is the principle procedure in which the parties’ allegations and evidence are taken place, focusing on the court in the process of criminal procedure and the trial process.

In order to determine credibility of the statement after the first instance court conducted the witness examination procedure, not only is it consistent with the rationality, logic, contradiction, or rule of experience of the content itself, but also is consistent with evidence or a third party's statement in the open court after being sworn before a judge.