(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.06.25 2014고합251

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) 전주지방법원 2015.06.25 2014고합251

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(친족관계에의한강제추행)

Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the victim C’s mother D on September 21, 2004, who reported marriage on September 21, 2004, and the victim’s usheshes.

1. On April 13, 2014, the Defendant, who committed the crime on April 13, 2014, went out of the Defendant’s home toilet located in Seojin-gu, Jeonjin-gu, Seoul, to take a bath, and went back to the Defendant, who was off his clothes to take a bath.

On the other hand, the Defendant continued to hold a brush with the body of the victim, and brupted with the victim as the water, and brupted with the victim, that “I shall see who can brush, who can brut, who can brut, see, who will brut, who will brut, and who will brut, if you will brut, who will brut, who will brut,” and that the victim's brut with the victim's brut with the victim's brut with the victim's brut with the victim's brut with the victim's brut.

2. The crime committed on April 14, 2014;

A. On April 14, 2014, the Defendant, at the same place as the preceding paragraph at around 05:00 on April 14, 2014, posted the victim’s name above, and committed an indecent act by hand by deceiving the victim’s chest.

B. The Defendant reported that the victim entered the after-school house at the above place around P.m. on the same day as the preceding paragraph, and told that “it is necessary to see our son’s son, son, and son, this would have to do so.” In addition, the Defendant committed an indecent act by inserting his hand into the panty in which the victim was suffering, and by inserting his hand into the panty line.

2. The Defendant alleged that he had the victim take a bath in relation to Paragraph 1 of the facts charged, but there is no fact that he did not take a finger in the sound book of the victim, and that there is no fact in relation to Paragraph 2, and denies all the facts charged in the instant case.

3. Stenographic records against C, the victim as evidence directly supporting the facts charged in this case, which correspond to the facts charged.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2018.03.22 2017노2859

-대구고등법원 2015.11.05 2015노386

-광주지방법원 2012.11.01 2012고합584

-서울남부지방법원 2012.12.28 2011고합570

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2018.09.20 2018고합127