logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.07.07 2016노648
강제추행
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The statements made by the victim that the defendant had committed an indecent act from the summary of the grounds for appeal are consistent and concrete, and thus, there is credibility, and the defendant's assertion is low credibility, but it is difficult to believe otherwise the victim's statement.

In light of the above, the judgment of the court below acquitted the defendant.

2. Based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt as to the facts charged of the instant case.

The judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant on the ground that it is difficult to see it is just and acceptable, and the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

A. The prosecutor is accurately and consistently stating the content of the prosecution from the first statement to the legal testimony by the injured person.

The argument is asserted.

However, the victim is that the defendant was soon in the police station.

The statement was made several times, and then (the evidence record No. 134, 138, 150 pages) and was about to be prompt from the prosecutor's investigation.

It has not made an accurate and consistent statement about the content itself, such as changing statements (as evidence record No. 175).

B. The prosecutor shows that the victim actually purchased the drug at the K pharmacy after committing the crime, and therefore, the victim appears to have been credibility in the statement of the victim since the victim could have actually purchased the drug at the K pharmacy.

The argument is asserted.

However, the contents of the above certification are the name, location, and explanation of the usage of the drug that the pharmacist could not memory but the victim purchased.

The purport of “the victim” is nothing more than 65 pages (Evidence No. 65 of the evidence record). Only can it be inferred that the victim actually purchased salt at the K pharmacy, and the victim was the next day following the crime.

arrow