2016No1440 Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Use of Cameras, etc.)

(Recording)

A

Prosecutor

Sponsor (prosecutions) and Lee Jong-hee (Trial)

Law Firm B, Attorney C

Busan District Court Decision 2015Ma2079 Decided April 7, 2016

November 18, 2016

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the fact that the defendant began to commit a crime using camera, etc. can be fully recognized. Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

In light of the records, a thorough examination of the evidence of this case, based on the reasons stated in its holding, the court below is just and acceptable to determine that the facts charged of this case constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the fact that the court below, based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, has access to the victim under the right of the victim, or that the defendant started to conduct a specific and direct act in order to enter video information into the cell phone by driving the video function of the victim's cell phone.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the prosecutor's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act. It is so decided as per Disposition (However, since it is obvious that the "the location of the victim's loss" in Section 21 of the judgment of the court below is the 'the location of the defendant's loss', it is obvious that it is the 'the location of the defendant's loss', it is correct ex officio

The extent of presiding judge,

Judges Kang Tae-ho

Judges Shin Dong-ho