[1] In a case where a person having authority to file a complaint regarding an offense subject to victim's complaint expresses his/her intent to demand the punishment of the offender after being examined as a victim or witness by an investigative agency, and the declaration of such intent is recorded in the protocol

[2] The case holding that if the victim expressed his/her intent to punish the defendant while committing indecent act by compulsion and such expression was recorded in the victim's statement protocol prepared by the investigative agency, such expression constitutes a legitimate complaint even if it was made in the form of responding to the police officer's questioning

[1] Article 237 of the Criminal Procedure Act / [2] Article 237 of the Criminal Procedure Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 85Do190 delivered on March 12, 1985 (Gong1985, 587)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Yellow Cleanup

Daegu High Court Decision 2008No541 Decided April 23, 2009

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to the violation of the Act on the Rape, Injury, Narcotics Control, Etc.

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, it is just that the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles, violation of the rules of evidence, incomplete hearing, etc. as otherwise alleged. In addition, there is no error of law as alleged in the investigation process and the

2. As to the violation of the Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

A complaint in an offense subject to prosecution on complaint may be filed in writing and orally with a declaration of intent to commit a crime against an investigation agency and to seek punishment against an offender. Since the protocol prepared by a public prosecutor or judicial police officer who has received an oral complaint does not need to be an independent protocol, it constitutes a legitimate complaint if the complainant makes a statement from an investigation agency that includes an expression of intent to demand punishment against the offender after being examined as a victim or witness by the investigative agency and such declaration of intent is entered in the protocol (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 65Do1089, Jan. 31, 196; 85Do190, Mar. 12, 1985).

According to the records, the victim was investigated into the victim on January 31, 2008 by an investigative agency, and the defendant made a statement of the above victim's indecent act as shown in the facts charged and made a statement of intent demanding the punishment of the defendant at the time of his/her expression of intent and entered in the statement prepared at the time of his/her expression of intent. Thus, according to the legal principles as seen earlier, the victim's expression of intent in this part of the facts charged was lawful accusation, and it is not different because the victim's expression

In the same purport, the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance which dismissed the public prosecution on this part, and it is just to send the case to the court of first instance, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles as to complaint in a crime subject

In addition, in this case where an appeal was filed against the judgment of reversal and return, the number of detention days after the appeal is included in the "number of detention days after the reversal of the judgment of the court below" under Article 482 (5) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and therefore, it is clearly stated that it is naturally included in the above provision.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Sung-tae (Presiding Justice)