beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the victim clearly expresses his intention of refusal, such as reducing the loss of the defendant's sudden indecent act or moving the defendant to another place, and the victim moves together with the defendant for his own act and does not allow or permit the defendant to commit an indecent act, and does not allow or permit the defendant's act of committing an indecent act. Although the victim later stated the fact of damage late, it is because the victim suffered damage even if the victim knew of the fact of damage in sexual violence crime, it is recognized that the defendant committed an indecent act by force as stated in the facts charged of this case.
Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case, it erred by misapprehending the facts and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
Judgment
On the other hand, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the evidence presented by the prosecutor as to the facts charged in this case, based on its stated reasoning, cannot be readily concluded that the defendant's act objectively causes a sense of sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is contrary to good sexual morality, and thus infringing the victim E's sexual freedom. It is insufficient to have reasonable doubt as to the fact that the defendant had the intention to commit an indecent act to infringe upon the victim's sexual freedom while recognizing that the defendant's act was contrary to the victim's intent, and there
In full view of the circumstances admitted by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of misconception of facts as alleged by the prosecutor.
Therefore, the prosecutor's above assertion is without merit.
In conclusion, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act is not reasonable.