Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant did not commit an indecent act against the victim.
Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.
B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of three million won and the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. The lower court determined that: (a) based on the following circumstances: (i) the victim consistently and specifically states the circumstances before and after the instant crime and the situation at the time of the instant crime; and (ii) the CCTV images appear to coincide with considerable parts of the situation before and after the instant crime; but (b) the Defendant’s statement to investigation agency is not consistent with the aforementioned images, the lower court determined that the Defendant could sufficiently believe the victim’s statement; and (c) the Defendant could recognize the facts that
Examining the above judgment in a thorough comparison with the records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.
B. Although the fact that the defendant has no record of punishment for the same kind of crime is recognized, according to the circumstances such as the fact that the victim was suffering from a considerable sense of sexual humiliation due to the indecent act of this case, it is reasonable to punish the defendant strictly according to the following: (a) although the defendant was unable to reach an agreement with the victim; (b) denying the crime of this case; and (c) consistent reasoning with the victim.
In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, there is no special change of circumstances that make the original judgment and the punishment different from the circumstances after the crime, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.
3. Conclusion.