logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2020.09.25 2019노3272
준강제추행
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. On April 16, 2018, the Defendant asserted that: (a) around 02:30 on April 16, 2018, the Defendant stated that the victim was aware of the victim’s identity at the time and told that he/she would be able to enjoy the right next thereto; and (b) he/she did not have a dance on the victim’s body.

However, the victim testified to the effect that "the defendant was stimulated, not stimulated, or stimulated," in the court of the court below, while consistently stating this part of the facts charged, it is obvious that the defendant's assertion contrary thereto is false.

In addition, the defendant argued that he was aware of his wife. However, the victim was guilty of indecent act on the part of the defendant, considering the fact that the defendant was aware of his wife after the completion of his drinking place and then changed his wife and room, the defendant seems to have been aware of it. The body and head of the victim and the defendant's wife changed so that the defendant could easily distinguish his wife with the victim. The defendant could have easily distinguish his wife, and the defendant committed indecent act on the part of the victim again after he committed indecent act on the part of the victim.

Nevertheless, the court below acquitted this part of the facts charged, and the judgment of the court below erred by mistake of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (limited to eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and forty hours of order to attend a course) is too uneasible and unreasonable.

The court below's decision on the misunderstanding of facts is without examining whether the defendant's wife was replaced by the victim and the defendant's wife was aware of the fact that the victim was locked since his family was locked at the beginning, while explaining the grounds of the judgment of the court below in detail under the title of "2. Judgment of the court below". Rather, the victim is the investigative agency.

arrow