(영문) 울산지방법원 2018.08.10 2018노535 | 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) 울산지방법원 2018.08.10 2018노535

강제추행

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. 항소 이유의 요지 피고인은 공소사실 기재와 같이 피해자의 왼쪽 엉덩이를 1회 툭 친 사실이 없음에도 원심은 사실을 오인하여 피고인에게 유죄를 선고 하였다.

2. In light of the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the statement made by the first instance court was clearly erroneous in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court.

Unless there exist special circumstances to view that maintaining the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is significantly unfair, or considering the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted not later than the closing of the appellate trial, the appellate court should not reverse without permission the first instance judgment on the sole ground that the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance court is different from the appellate court’s judgment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Do3846, Jun. 24, 2010). In light of the above legal principles, the lower court and the first instance court recognized and investigated by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court of first instance, namely, (i) the victim has a fact that the Defendant left at his own port on the day from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court to the date of the first instance trial.

A consistent statement; ② The victim posted a statement to the effect that the Defendant was her SNS immediately after the victim committed an indecent act; ② The victim filed a complaint with an investigative agency by coercioning the Defendant; ③ The CCTV images show that the Defendant can see that the victim’s body was locked; ④ The victim’s statement is very specific and is false.

In contrast, it is difficult to see that the damaged person is guilty of the defendant.

참조판례

-대법원 2010. 6. 24. 선고 2010도3846 판결

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 2021.02.23 2020노1244

-대전지방법원 2018.11.01 2018노918

-전주지방법원 2017.01.12 2016노954

-전주지방법원 2018.01.18 2017노1450

-대전지방법원 2017.07.06 2016노3766