(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.07.21 2017고단1687

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) 광주지방법원 2017.07.21 2017고단1687

강제추행

Text

1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 4,000,000 won;

2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On April 1, 2017, the Defendant: (a) around 03:30 to 04:00, at “D” located on the second floor, Gwangju Northern-gu C2 (hereinafter “the instant drinking house”); (b) the Defendant, an employee, and (c) the Victim E (V), who was sitting and drinking, and the Defendant, who was working for the drinking, kid, kid, and Austria.

"The victim's chest part of the victim's chest with his/her hand while making his/her speech, and the victim's bucks part of the victim's bucks only once, and the victim's indecent act was enforced.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of the witness E;

1. Each police statement made in relation to F (tentative name) and E (tentative name);

1. 112 Reporting case handling table;

1. A photograph of a closure;

1. The result of reproduction and viewing of on-site CCTV CDs [the defendant and his defense counsel denies that the defendant only dice with the victim while drinking alcohol in the instant drinking house, and that there is no fact that the victim made the victim a speech identical to the facts of the crime in the judgment, or that the victim's chest and buckbucks did not meet the victim's chest

However, in a case where a witness’s statement, including the victim, is mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, it shall not be rejected without any separate evidence to deem the credibility of the statement objectively, unless it is objectively deemed objectively, and there is no other reliable evidence to deem the witness’s statement to be objectively acceptable. The mere fact that the witness’s statement in the major part is not somewhat consistent with the witness’s statement on other minor matters in the case of consistency, does not unreasonably deny the credibility of the statement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2012Do2631, Jun. 28, 2012; 2007Do10728, Mar. 14, 2008). According to each of the above evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court, the victim has consistently stated in the investigative agency and this court as a substitute for the act committed by the defendant, the previous and subsequent circumstances, and the contents of the witness’s statement in this case’s former and subsequent circumstances, as well as the contents of the CCTV in this case’s statement.

참조판례

-대법원 2008.3.14. 선고 2007도10728 판결

-대법원 2012. 6. 28. 선고 2012도2631 판결

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2017.11.17 2017고단3692

-광주지방법원 2017.08.25 2017고단2158

-광주지방법원 2017.08.11 2017고단1706

-광주지방법원 2017.03.10 2016고단5530

-광주지방법원 2017.05.19 2017고단1075