logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.29 2015고단8323
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(공중밀집장소에서의추행)
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On October 21, 2015, from around 06:10 to around 06:20 on the same day, the Defendant committed indecent act in a densely-populated place in the public place by covering the victim F (e.g., age 21) who was divingd in the surface of “E Sari” located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, with the victim’s hand, and allowing the victim’s hand to cover his sexual organ out of the clothes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. Some statements made against the defendant during the police interrogation protocol;

1. In determining the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc. supporting the facts charged, the court below determined the credibility of the statements made by the victim, etc., taking into account all the circumstances that make it difficult to record in the witness examination protocol, such as the appearance and attitude of the witness who is taking an oath before a judge, and the pen of the statement, and the pen of the witness examination protocol, which are hard to record in the open court after taking an oath, in light of the witness’s appearance and attitude, and the pen of the statement, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Do7917, Jan. 30, 2009). In light of the consistent and consistent facts charged, if the statements made by the witness, including the victim, are objectively consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it should not be rejected as long as there is no other reliable evidence that it is difficult to view such credibility from an objective point of view of the witness’s statement to the victim’s body and the victim’s body at the time of this case (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Do631, Jun. 28, 20120, etc.).

arrow