(영문) 서울고등법원 2013.08.16 2013노1772 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2013.08.16 2013노1772

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자준강간등)등

Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant and the person subject to a request for attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant 1”) and the Defendant asserted misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, only attempted to have sexual intercourse with the victim at the time of committing the crime, with the knowledge of the victim’s self-determination at the time of committing the crime, and did not exercise force or power during that process, the lower court, by misunderstanding the fact, acknowledged a minor under the age of 13 by force against the Defendant, thereby committing sexual intercourse with the minor under the age of 13. 2) The Defendant was in

3) The lower court’s assertion of unfair sentencing (five years of imprisonment) was too unreasonable and deemed unfair. B. 1) The Defendant asserted that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and commenced an act to have sexual intercourse with the victim from the moment when the Defendant puts his hand into the victim’s clothes, regardless of whether he was able to resist, and the victim’s sexual intercourse was established, and thus, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the primary charges by misapprehending the legal doctrine on quasi-rape.

2. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The judgment of the court below as to the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (the part concerning the conjunctive facts charged as a crime) also asserted the same purport as the above grounds for appeal, and the court below rejected the above assertion in detail with the defendant's and his defense counsel's argument in the "decision on the defendant's and defense counsel's assertion". In comparison with the evidential materials, a thorough examination of the judgment of the court below reveals that the defendant did not assault or assault the victim at the time of the crime of this case, but it can be sufficiently recognized that the fact that the defendant used force to suppress the victim's intent as the court below did. Thus,

Therefore, it is true.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2013.08.28 2013노1986

-서울고등법원 2014.01.24 2013노3006

-서울고등법원 2020.07.23 2020노677

-서울고등법원 2015.02.05 2014노2212

-서울고등법원 2013.07.12 2013노1674