beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals filed by A and Defendant B and prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
I. Determination on the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor on the part not guilty (including the part not guilty on the grounds) in the judgment below
1. The part regarding “rape-rape” against Defendant A
A. The gist of the grounds of appeal is as follows: (a) In full view of the testimony made by the victim H (the victim H, the 22 years of age, the 22 years of age, and the video content submitted by the prosecutor as evidence; and (b) the victim H was in a state of mental and physical loss or non-competence in the state of full appearance.
In addition, it is reasonable to see that the victim H was aware of the sexual intercourse with Defendant A.
It is difficult to see it.
Nevertheless, the court below rendered not guilty of the facts charged against Defendant A. In this regard, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles.
B. In a criminal trial, the prosecutor bears the burden of proving the criminal facts prosecuted in the criminal trial, and the finding of guilt must be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge sure that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, even if the defendant is suspected of guilt, the interest of the defendant should be determined (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do1151, Jul. 22, 2010). Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court based on the above legal principles, based on the records, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone proves that this part of the facts charged against the defendant A was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below that acquitted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged does not err in the misapprehension of facts as alleged by the public prosecutor.
Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.
2. Defendant B’s “Indecent Act against the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Act by Forced Intrusion upon Residence)” and Defendant A.