(영문) 창원지방법원 2018.04.12 2017노3262 | 리걸엔진

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) 창원지방법원 2018.04.12 2017노3262

강제추행

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as stated in the facts charged, did not commit an indecent act by rhyming the victim’s sound at the bottom.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, and the community service order of 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s indecent act against the victim, such as the facts charged, is recognized.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is just, and the Defendant’s assertion of mistake is without merit.

1) The victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the court of the court below, went through the direction where the Defendant, who was walking on the opposite side from the D pharmacy in the front side of the D pharmacy around 05:08, she continued to walk in the direction where the victim was able to see and see the sound side of the victim.

If the injured party is only satisfy with the defendant even before the packaging end in his place, it will go beyond the match.

In light of the F’s testimony and investigation report (see, e.g., report on the statement of a police officer on dispatch of the scene), the Defendant was under the influence of denying the credibility of the victim’s statement in light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s breathous statement (“the Defendant”) was made; (b) the background and method of committing an indecent act; (c) the background and method of committing an indecent act; and (d) the circumstances after the prosecution; and (c) most consistent and concrete.

[2] It is difficult to see that the lower court’s court’s judgment held that the Defendant was an indecent act on the way on which the Defendant’s proxy driver was detained, and that the Defendant committed an indecent act at the point on which the Defendant was a proxy driver.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2018.01.11 2017노7163

-부산지방법원 2020.02.21 2019고단6287

-의정부지방법원 2018.01.25 2017고합315

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.06.10 2016노1128

-서울고등법원 2018.05.11 2017노3862