아동복지법위반(아동에대한음행강요ㆍ매개ㆍ성희롱등)등
The judgment below
The guilty portion shall be reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 15,000,000.
The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Although the victims made a statement to the effect that the defendant was exposed to sexual intercourse on a date other than the facts charged in the instant case, it was proved that the defendant was absent from the date and time, place, and the victim's statement was erroneous in the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the crime on June 11, 2017 due to lack of credibility.
B. In light of the consistent statement of the victims of the misunderstanding of facts, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged even though the Defendant had sufficiently proven that the crime was committed on June 28, 2017.
2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the amount of KRW 15 million, the amount of KRW 40 hours to complete a sexual assault treatment program, the disclosure of information, and the order of notification) is too uneasible and unreasonable.
2. In full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the prosecutor's assertion of the non-guilty part of the judgment below, the court below found the victim not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that the victim made a statement that he had the same sense as the victim's taking his hand in the court of the court below, even according to the victim's statement, the victim's assertion that he included his hand in the victim's hand in order to remove the inconvenience of sexual intercourse, and there is a possibility that the victim who observed the defendant's behavior was misunderstanding the defendant's behavior or exaggeratedly made his degree, and that it is difficult to regard the victim's sexual abuse or obscenity merely because the defendant had observed the other person's sexual behavior by inserting hand, etc., the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.
The lower court’s aforementioned determination.