logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2019.07.05 2019노934
아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강제추행)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds of the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which is the primary charge, and found the Defendant guilty on the indecent act by compulsion, which is the ancillary charge.

In this case, only the defendant appealed, and in accordance with the principle of no appeal, the part not guilty in the reasoning is also transferred to the court. However, the part not guilty in the reason is already excluded from the object of the attack and defense between the parties and is virtually separated from the object of the trial.

Therefore, the conclusion of the judgment of the court below shall be followed with respect to the acquittal portion of the above reasons, and this court shall not re-determine it.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error of facts and misapprehension of legal principles (guilty part in the original judgment) The Defendant, while under the influence of alcohol, did not keep the victim’s clothes retail properly and puts down the victim’s clothes retail at the end of his attempt, and does not use the victim’s clothes retail over twice as stated in the judgment of the court below. The Defendant did not intend to commit indecent act by compulsion against the Defendant.

In addition, the defendant's act of taking the victim in bad faith or walking the victim's clothes retail does not constitute an indecent act in the crime of indecent act by compulsion.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and mistake.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (a fine of three million won, etc.) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. On the basis of the evidence adopted and examined, the lower court determined that the Defendant, based on the erroneous determination of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, set up the following facts or circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence: (a) on the basis of the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court, putting the victim’s hand on his/her hand, and putting the victim’s hand on two occasions with his/her left hand; and (b) putting the victim’s clothes retail in walking.

arrow