logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2017.05.25 2016고단4804
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On April 30, 2016, around 00:55, the Defendant attempted to take and take the Defendant’s mobile phone of the Defendant who had a recording function of the camera in the victim’s body by detecting the victim’s cell phone by discovering the shorter f (e.g., 18 years of age) under the influence of alcohol in front of the entrance opening of the subway E Station No. 2 located in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul. Around April 30, 2016, the Defendant attempted to take and take the Defendant’s cell phone of the Defendant who had a recording function of the camera on the part of the victim body, but did not go back with the wind that the victim reported back to the back.

2. Determination

A. Among the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the video files stored in the CCTV image CD (hereinafter “the instant file”) were taken by police officers with the cell phone camera of a police officer with the consent of the CCTV owner or manager, and then copied the files generated as a result to the CD again by a police officer after copying the video on his/her own computer, and then copied the files into the CD. The photograph of the CCTV-cape and the CCTV screen screen (hereinafter “the instant photograph”). The police officer printed out the images taken in the mobile phone camera again by reproducing the images taken in the mobile phone camera as seen above by the police officer with a specific page.

In the case of documents, etc. copied or printed from a digital storage medium, which are contained in a digital storage medium, the requirement of “identification and integrity” is required in order to recognize admissibility of evidence, and if such requirement is not satisfied, the digital evidence may not be admitted as admissibility.

The original file that photographs the images reproduced from CCTV devices cannot be deemed to have been reproduced by electronic means in relation to CCTV images, and the identity and integrity with the CCTV images at issue in digital evidence cannot be deemed to be the requirement for admissibility of evidence. However, the instant file itself is the original file that photographs the images reproduced from CCTV devices.

arrow