logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.04.22 2016노450
강제추행치상
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

misunderstanding of the substance of the grounds for appeal or misunderstanding of the legal principles, at the time of the instant case, the Defendant: (a) by hand the victim’s flabation; (b) flabing the victim’s flab; (c) flabing the victim’s flab; and (d) flabing the victim’s flab; and (

However, as the defendant was notified by the victim who had been 5 to 6 times of sexual intercourse without any reason, and became subject to insult and assault, the defendant's act was caused by the above-mentioned act, and the defendant was merely intentionally committed the above act, and there was no intention of coercion.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the bodily injury caused by the defendant's forced indecent act is erroneous or erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles on forced indecent act.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (4 years of suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for three years) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In fact, indecent act on the assertion of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles is objectively an act that causes sexual humiliation or aversion to the general public and is contrary to the good sexual moral sense, and thus infringing on the victim’s sexual freedom. Whether it is so determined should be carefully determined by comprehensively taking into account the victim’s intent, gender, age, relationship between the perpetrator and the victim prior to such act, circumstances leading to such act, specific circumstances leading to such act, the surrounding objective situation, and the sexual moral sense in that time.

In addition, there is no subjective motive or objective to stimulate sexual humiliation as a subjective element necessary for the establishment of the crime of indecent act by compulsion (see Supreme Court Decision 2013Do5856, Sept. 26, 2013, etc.). According to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant is a person who suffers sexual intercourse from the injury to the investigation agency’s trial.

arrow