In a case where the Defendant, the father of the child Gap who was born about eight months after birth, was prosecuted for violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes (child Abuse) on the ground that he was guilty on the part of the Defendant, on the ground that the Defendant, a father of the child Gap, who was born about eight months after birth, was shotly shaking back front and rearly in front of one minute, and was seled with both arms of Gap continuously sken and kneed with a pipe Gap rapidly and strongly, or kneely kneely left after the head of the Defendant’s head, caused death by skeing the floor of his head, and caused death, the Defendant was guilty.

In a case where Defendant (B) was indicted for violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Crimes of Child Abuse (Child Abuse) on the ground that Defendant (B) was guilty of committing an act of harming A’s head, etc., on the ground that he was guilty of committing an act of harming A’s head, etc., by harming A’s head, and breaking B’s head, without having a pipeed both arms fast and strong, or kneeing B’s head, and repeated an act of lowering B’s head at a rapid and rapid speed, and then skneeing B’s head, which led to death, the case held that the Defendant’s act of breaking A’s head, etc. was committed at the expense of Defendant A’s head and 1 hour after her head, and that the act of breaking A’s head, etc. was committed at a very rapid and rapid intervals between Defendant A’s head, and that it could be evaluated that Defendant A’s her head and her head could have been found that there was a serious danger of her head.

Article 2 subparag. 4(a) and (b), and Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes; Article 3 subparag. 7 of the Child Welfare Act; Article 260(1) and Article 273(1) of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Lee & Lee, et al.

Law Firm Onnuri, et al.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

The defendant shall order the completion of a child abuse treatment program for 120 hours.

[Dual Facts]

The Defendant, who is a legal spouse, is four children, who are 12 years of age, 9, 5 years of age, and 1 years of age (the birth on April 5, 201), respectively, between Nonindicted 1 (the female, 41 years of age, and the marriage report on December 4, 2001) and four years of age, who are 12 years of age, 9, 5 years of age, and 1 years of age (the birth on April 5, 2015). Nevertheless, from around September 2014, the Defendant was able to teach with Nonindicted 3 (the female, 39 years of age), and was living with said Nonindicted 3 from January 2015, and the said Nonindicted 3 was pregnant with Nonindicted 4 and gave birth to the victim on January 4, 2016.

After that, the Defendant, while living together with Nonindicted 3 on November 2015, brought a divorce lawsuit against Nonindicted 1, his spouse, as the wind of Nonindicted 3, and brought the lawsuit. However, Nonindicted 1 and 4 children born between Nonindicted 1 and 3, the Defendant was not able to properly look at the foregoing Nonindicted 2 (the birth of April 5, 2015), who was in the heart from the time of his death, and was in the same line of view.

In such a situation, in addition to paying the amount of KRW 2 million to Nonindicted 1, his spouse’s child support and living expenses each month, the Defendant took an economic burden with excessive liability. However, in order to care for Nonindicted 1 and 4 children, Nonindicted 3, the spouse, who was a female living together, made a false statement to the company, and carried out dual living with Nonindicted 1’s house and the residence of the Defendant in fathercheon-do, who was living together, in order to care for the said children, the Defendant took a sense that he was unable to play a role as his parent in physical and mental stress, excessive liability, and the economic burden due to excessive debt, who was 4 children. Furthermore, in order to arrange the relationship with Nonindicted 3 and return to Nonindicted 1 and 4 children, the Defendant was unable to look at the victim and the victim. In order to care for the said children, the Defendant did not want to talk with the victim.

【Criminal Facts】

Around 09:21 on September 11, 2016, the Defendant got a text message asking Nonindicted 1 and 4 spouse’s non-indicted 1 and 4 children as promised with the non-indicted 1’s spouse. In order to meet, the Defendant sent to Nonindicted 3, who was a female living together, “I will return to the company up to 14:00, which was before the beginning of the extra class,” and went to the Defendant’s own house, and the spouse’s non-indicted 1 and 4 children were sent to the ○○○○ church located in the ○○○○○○○ branch in which the spouse and 1 and 4 children are going to go to the company, while Nonindicted 3 sent the text message asking Nonindicted 1 and 4 children “I would soon go to go to the extra class,” and the Defendant’s spouse and 1 and 4 children who want to return to the same house were put to prison, but they were forced to return without any inevitable reason, and they were able to return to the spouse and children.

The Defendant, at around 14:45 on the same day, was transferred to Nonindicted 3, who was on board the baby in the first floor parking lot of the apartment house underground in the Gidong-gu, Gidong-si ( Address omitted), and was taking over the victim who was on board the baby from Nonindicted 3 (the birth was eight months thereafter).

피고인은 2016. 9. 11. 14:49경 위 주거지 아파트 지하 1층 승강기 출입구에서 승강기를 기다리던 중, 평소에 피해자가 심하게 울고 보챌 때 쉽게 달래지지 않아 힘이 들고, 조금 전 배우자 공소외 1의 자녀들이 가지 말라고 만류하였으나 동거녀 공소외 3의 재촉으로 귀가할 수밖에 없었던 상황 등으로 인해 짜증이 나게 되자, 피해자가 타고 있는 유모차를 피해자의 몸과 머리가 심하게 들썩거릴 정도로 1분 5초 동안 약 23회에 걸쳐 앞뒤로 강하게 흔들고, 계속하여 15:40경 위 피고인의 주거지 아파트 안에서 약 30분 정도 잠을 자고 일어난 피해자가 잠에서 깨어 심하게 울면서 울음을 그치지 않자 양팔을 피해자의 겨드랑이 사이에 낀 채 피해자를 빠르고 강하게 위아래로 수회 흔들고, 계속하여 피해자를 피고인의 머리 뒤로 넘겼다가 무릎까지 빠른 속도로 내리면서 흔드는 행위를 반복하다가 피해자를 머리 뒤로 넘긴 상태에서 피해자를 놓쳐 피해자로 하여금 거실 바닥에 떨어지게 하였다.

On September 30, 2016, the Defendant, at △△ University Hospital located in Suwon-si on September 30, 2016, caused the death of a victim who was receiving medical treatment due to the climatic blood, brain side, dystrophism, and the dystrophal typosis, as brain liver.

1. The defendant's partial statement in the first trial record;

1. Legal statement of the witness Nonindicted 5

1. Video-recording CD images (the Defendant’s motion picture and the Defendant’s motion picture each page 1);

1. Each prosecutor and police suspect interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Each police statement on Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 1, and Nonindicted 6

1. Protocol of examination of evidence by the police, on-site examination photographs (Evidence No. 2, 1078 pages of evidence records);

1. Each doctor’s statement (the doctor Nonindicted 5, Nonindicted 6, and Nonindicted 7), death diagnosis statement (the preparation of the doctor Nonindicted 8), investigation report (the doctor’s oral opinion after viewing the abused video of Nonindicted 7), minutes of the Special Advisory Committee on Child Abuse Case, and written opinions

1. A request for appraisal by the National Scientific Investigation Institute;

1. 12Report sheet, report on the results of investigation of a person who has suffered from a change in the family register (attached to photographs of a change in the family register and field);

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 4, Article 2 subparag. 4(a) and (b) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes, Article 2 subparag. 4(a) and Article 260(1) and Article 273(1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Discretionary mitigation;

Articles 53 and 55(1)3 (C) of the Criminal Act

1. Order to complete programs;

Article 8(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes

1. Summary of the assertion

Although the defendant's scam is an abuse of the victim's loss, it could not be seen that the victim died, and the defendant could not expect that the victim will die due to the scambling of the motor vehicle.

Under the above circumstances, the Defendant died of the victim due to the act of harming the victim, and the Defendant was also aware of the risk of the act. However, the Defendant only committed such act in order to sleep the victim in the future. Thus, the Defendant did not constitute the abuse and did not have the intent of abuse.

2. Determination

A. Whether the defendant's act of abuse and intent of abuse can be recognized

(1) Relevant legal principles

(A) Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes provides that a person who commits a crime of child abuse shall be punished as a crime of child abuse when the person who commits the crime of child abuse causes the death of a child. Meanwhile, under the above Act, “child abuse crime” refers to a crime of assault, abuse, etc. under the Criminal Act due to child abuse by his/her guardian, and “child abuse” refers to “an act of physical, mental, sexual violence, or cruel acts that may injure the health of a child or impede normal development of a child” under Article 3 subparag. 7 of the Child Welfare Act. Therefore, in this case, when comprehensively interpreting the concept, etc. of the crime of child abuse under the Criminal Act, the issue is whether the Defendant’s act may be included in the act of abuse, which constitutes the premise for the application of the above provision.

(B) Meanwhile, the criminal intent in the crime of abuse does not necessarily require a planned intention of abuse. It is sufficient to recognize or anticipate the possibility or risk of causing another person's abuse due to one's own act, and it is also acknowledged as willful negligence. However, in order to have dolusence, there is a perception of the possibility of the occurrence of the crime, and furthermore, there is an internal intent to allow the risk of the crime. Whether the perpetrator has accepted the possibility of the crime, or not, should be confirmed from the perspective of the offender, considering how the possibility of the crime is assessed if the general public is based on specific circumstances, such as the form of the act and the situation of the act performed outside, rather than dependent on the statement of the offender (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do74, May 14, 2004, etc.).

(2) Determination

Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances that can be acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, it is reasonable to view that the series of acts by the Defendant, by scambling the victim’s scambling the victim and scambling the victim with his arms, and scambling the victim with his arms, may be evaluated as an abuse pursuant to the aforementioned legal doctrine, and that the Defendant had the intention of scambling the victim. This is difficult to view the Defendant as having the intention of abuse or planned abuse, or that there was no other circumstance to deem that there was a child abuse except the instant case, solely on the ground that: (a) the Defendant was unable to deem that there was an intention of abuse or planned abuse; (b) the Defendant had committed the act as mentioned above with the intent of re-taking the victim;

[As to the attitude of the defendant's act]

① During about 23 minutes, the Defendant was slided in front and rear the part of the part of the Defendant, i.e., head, neck, etc. in front and rear of the part of the part of the Defendant, by breaking the body of the victim when the Defendant was able to board the Defendant in front and rear of the part of the Defendant. In the video where the string of the string of the strings is taken, the Defendant’s body and head of the string of the string of the string of approximately 23 times. The string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the instant case is clear that the Defendant’s body and head on board the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the string of the Defendant.

② In line with the Defendant’s knee and knee, the Defendant had kneeed the Victim with both hands and knee, and repeated the Victim’s knee. At that time, even if the Defendant was aware of the Victim’s knee and knee, the Defendant did not see the Victim’s kne, despite the Defendant’s awareness of the Victim’s knee, and the knee was born, and the Defendant was seated with the Victim’s kne, and accordingly the Defendant was shakeed accordingly. In addition, the Defendant seems to have been shakeed of the Victim’s kne at a relatively rapid speed.

③ Even based on the Defendant’s statement, the Defendant 4-5 times knee, kneeing up to the head height, was 3-4 times. Ultimately, considering that the number of times in which the victim physically shakeed, and that the type of the arrester’s figure, when verifying on-site, would be less than the actual victim, it is clear in light of the size of the above action, etc., and thus, it would be clear in light of empirical rule that the shock was increased.

④ Although the Defendant asserts to the effect that the so-called aircraft play, the so-called aircraft play means that the so-called aircraft play in both hands and that the above booms down in front of its head. The Defendant’s act is an ordinary person’s common sense, and it is clearly distinguishable from ordinary aircraft play in light of the form of the victim’s tending or the shape of the Defendant’s act, such as the risk of harming the victim, in the process of taking the victim’s back to the rear part of his head by scaming the victim.

⑤ In addition, the Defendant’s act in order to be “sports” ought to see the victim’s enjoying, and even if based on the Defendant’s statement, the victim continued to have frighten, even if she left the victim behind several times, and the victim was an infant who was only eight months after the victim was unable to express her opinion, and the response of the victim as above, etc., it appears that the Defendant, by her own act, knew or could have known that the victim could have suffered suffering.

【Transfer Experience, etc. of Defendant】

① 피고인은 평소 피해자를 잡고 흔들었을 때 피해자의 안구가 빨갛게 충혈되는 것을 목격한 적도 있어 피해자를 흔드는 행위 자체의 위험성을 이미 인식하고 있었다고 볼 수 있다.

② Prior to the instant case, the Defendant received a request from Nonindicted 3, a mother of the victim, to refrain from scambling the victim. Since the Defendant’s act at that time appears to have been lower than the instant case, such as not moving back the son’s head, the Defendant, who was pointed out that it is also dangerous to scambling the victim to a relatively weak degree, may be deemed to have knowingly accepted that the Defendant’s act, as seen in the instant case, may cause more danger to the victim.

【Other Circumstances】

① Despite the above risk, the Defendant: (a) in a single set of the ward without any safety device that could mitigate shock if the victim is crashed, such as crypt, small wave, etc., the Defendant was shaking the victim; and (b) in the back of the head, the victim was placed on the floor of the ward so that the victim was transferred to

② In general, it is common to take measures against a son who does not string the aircraft play, and if the son ordinarily strings the son, he takes measures, such as stimulating or protruding him, and the Defendant has previously heard advice to the same effect as Non-Indicted 1. As the Defendant also heard prior advice to the same effect, the Defendant’s defense that the Defendant’s act was an action to reconstruct the knife by driving a victim who does not have to string the Defendant’s act was an fright natural stimule and an emergency.

③ The Defendant also recognized that the Defendant had been under pressure and congested due to double life and economic difficulties at the time of committing the crime. Even if the Defendant did not bring about until the victim’s mind to harm the victim, it seems clear that the Defendant had committed the above act without the victim’s assessment.

B. Whether causation and predictability between abuse and death can be acknowledged

(1) First, in the instant case, the Defendant’s act, regardless of his her marbling, and one hour after her marbling the victim, and then her marbling the victim with his marbling the victim up to her head, may be evaluated as a series of abusive acts committed under the Defendant’s single marcing criminal intent, in light of the following: (a) although the method of the act is divided into two parts; (b) the marbling method is not significant; and (c) the marbling method was made in the situation where the victim intends to see or booms the victim; and (d) the above two acts did not do

(2) According to the evidence as seen earlier, the defendant left the floor at a high level of the back of the defendant's head when he was shaking the victim at a very rapid speed, and caused the victim to sleep immediately, and after about one hour, he died of approximately four after he was under operation and medical treatment in the emergency room of △△ University Hospital, such as cryposis, brain salutism, and dyposis, etc. In light of the following: (1) the doctor in charge of the victim's medical treatment recognizes a medical causal relationship between the victim's head shock and death; (2) even based on the statement of the defendant and his non-indicted 3 and other related persons, it is reasonable to see that the victim's death could have been seriously affected by the defendant's death-related act, and (3) it is reasonable to see that the victim's death could have been caused by the defendant's death-related act and the defendant's death-related act could be seen that there was a serious injury to the defendant's body.

(3) Meanwhile, as seen earlier, the Defendant had shocked the body and head of the victim by seriously shakeing the her baby on the part of the victim. As such, Nonindicted 7’s emergency medical department, 362 pages, Nonindicted 5’s medical opinion (No. 366 pages of evidence) (No. 1st page 366), investigation report (no. 4th week after viewing the abused video of Nonindicted 7), minutes and written opinions of the Special Advisory Committee on Child Abuse Case (No. 5th week of the Special Advisory Committee on Child Abuse Case), the police statement of Nonindicted 6, the testimony of Nonindicted 5 in this court, etc. are likely to cause the her baby, and thus, there is a possibility that the her baby may cause the sulare, sulare, and sulare, so that there is a possibility that the sulare might eventually cause the sulare, sulare, and sulare, and there is room to view the medical relation between the victim’s death and the death.

However, unlike the United States or Japan, it is difficult to find out the cases of the death of a child due to the scambling of the son, and if scambling the son, there is a general perception of the society that the scam is not an ordinary child's health, and the scambling of the scambling is allowed to some extent, at least there is no unified theory in the domestic medical academic community.

Therefore, the possibility of the victim’s death cannot be determined solely based on the above medical relationship. However, the Defendant’s above assertion on the premise that the victim’s act was not an abuse under the above premise that the victim’s act was not an abuse. As long as the above act constitutes a series of abusive acts as well as a trace of her mother, it cannot be determined the causal relationship or predictability of the death by removing only the her scambling act. Furthermore, as the Defendant was found at the early stage of the occurrence of the instant case without the victim’s skeing act under the above mentioned below, the Defendant suspected of the death by the scambling after the scambling act in the scambling of the scambling body. After that, the Defendant’s scambling act was recognized to have caused brain damage to the victim, and the victim’s scambling with the scambling of the scambling body under the above condition does not have any influence on the conclusion of the scambling act.

1. Scope of applicable sentences under law: Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and six months to 15 years;

2. Scope of recommendations based on the sentencing criteria: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of two years and six months from one year to five years.

【Scope of Recommendation】

Child Abuse, Seriously Injury, Death, etc. under the Punishment of Child Abuse Act (Child Abuse Death, etc.) Class 2 (Child Abuse, etc. - 6 months from - 5 years)

【Special Convicted Persons】

When a person commits an intentional crime;

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for a period of three years and six months;

○○ An expression of intent and behavior are the sole means of expression for a child, which is only eight months after the victim’s birth. As both Nonindicted 3 and the Defendant in a de facto marital relationship with Nonindicted 3, the victim’s mother, were recognized, the victim, in particular, or sound. The Defendant was seriously shaking the victim on the ground that he was aware of the obligation to rear the victim, and that the victim does not stop, and in the process, the victim was seriously shaking the victim, thereby breaking the floor. The victim was eventually killed even during approximately four weeks of surgery and treatment. In light of the background, method, age of the victim, relationship between the Defendant and the victim, etc., the Defendant’s liability is not less complicated.

○ The reason why the Defendant abused the victim and completed the death seems to have been an economic difficulty due to pressure due to the Defendant’s double life and excessive liability. In fact, according to the various data revealed in the records and pleadings of this case, the psychological burden that the Defendant experienced was reasonable, and such a burden has influenced the Defendant’s choice that the Defendant could not be complied with. However, the circumstance of the Defendant is not only related to the lower party’s life, but rather, constitutes a factor that emphasizes the Defendant’s non-liability against the victim.

○ In addition, it cannot be deemed that the environment of the Defendant’s face is due to the lack of social safety net, or that the society committed the instant crime as a result of the Defendant’s improper transfer of the burden of fostering the victim only to the individual. Rather, this is the first situation of the Defendant. Therefore, there is no circumstance to consider the motive or circumstance of the Defendant’s crime.

○ The Defendant reported 20 to 30 minutes after the scaming of the victim, and reported 119 minutes later, and made a false report. Such delay and false report led to the fact that the victim’s relief could not be promptly performed. Considering that the Defendant was under a sudden situation, the Defendant was not responsible for the Defendant’s non-liability, such as the likelihood of committing his crime, in addition to the victim’s awareness, who is the child who was seriously injured.

The ○ Victim’s friendly mother was placed in the place where the suffering of her own consciousness should be reduced due to the unexpected result of the instant case, and the Defendant seems to have not yet received a letter related thereto.

In light of the above point, the defendant requires a strict penalty corresponding to his responsibility, and the sentence is inevitable.

However, the following should be taken into account: (i) the first offender who has no record of criminal punishment; (ii) the Defendant abused the victim at ordinary times except for the fact that the Defendant himself/herself has committed several times as he/she was aware of the fact that he/she was guilty; (iii) the risk of the instant crime is considerably high; (iv) the Defendant appears to have somewhat weak degree than the typical abuse, such as physical punishment by the Gu or repeated harassment; and (v) the Defendant’s intention to commit the instant crime is not intended for abuse or planned abuse; and (v) the Defendant was raising the victim while maintaining a de facto marital relationship with Nonindicted 3, a mother of the victim; and (vi) the Defendant appears to have considerable psychological suffering due to the death of the victim; and (vi) the Defendant appears to have brought about the result that it is difficult to submit and cope with the statements several times after being detained.

In full view of the various circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, environment, character and conduct, motive, means and method of committing the crime, effort to recover damage after committing the crime, and the scope of recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines, the sentence was determined as ordered within the scope of recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Kim Jong-min (Presiding Judge)

Note 1) Evidence No. 113, CD 16

Note 2) It is difficult to provide that scams have a direct relationship with the death, provided, however, that how much strong external power has been exercised repeatedly and how much serious progress may not exist when the opinion on brain scamscamscam.”

Note 3) The statement "It is presumed that there is a possibility that the scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic

Note 4) The statement stating that “I can stalthm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm stalm m

5) Since the victims, such as the victim, etc. may die with a little shocking shocking shocking degree, it cannot be readily concluded that her freshing freshing freshing freshing solely based on the opinion on brain damage is a freshing freshing group. However, if a freshing freshing is found together with the freshing freshing, there is considerable room to regard her freshing fresh as a freshing f