(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.03.17 2015노2642 | 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) 서울고등법원 2016.03.17 2015노2642

미성년자의제강제추행등

Text

Defendant

In addition, all appeals filed by the person who requested the attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (the defendant 1) were unable to discover the facts and the result of the fixed reaction test with the victim was proved by voice, the court below found the defendant guilty of all of the indecent acts by force against minors and the rape of minors based on the victim's statement that lack credibility or lack consistency. The court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children against Sexual Abuse (Distribution of obscenity Production, etc.) by the defendant and the respondent for the attachment order (the defendant 1). However, the court below asserted that the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children against Sexual Abuse (the distribution of obscenity production, etc.) by the defendant's defense counsel submitted after the expiration of the submission period for the appeal.

It cannot be seen (see Supreme Court Decision 2006Do888 delivered on May 31, 2007). 2) The unfair sentencing of the lower court is too unreasonable.

3) It is unreasonable for the lower court to order unfair disclosure and notification order to disclose and notify the Defendant’s information for a period of seven years.

4) It is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to attach an electronic tracking device for a period of 10 years, even though the Defendant did not pose a risk of repeating a sexual crime.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. Part 1 of the case concerning the defendant's assertion of mistake as to the defendant's fact-finding, and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below. In other words, in relation to the fact that the victim committed an indecent act by force against the minor in an investigative agency, the victim was the victim Eul in 2014 when he first became aware of the defendant's alleged indecent act.

After the end of the school, the defendant brought a store in the middle of the school, and the defendant brought the increased number and room to the victim.

If the defendant is removed, he shall be given 10,000 won.

Every day the defendant's stores shall be located in the defendant's stores.

참조판례

-대법원 2007. 5. 31. 선고 2006도8488 판결

유사 판례

-광주고등법원 2017.09.21 2017노262

-대전고등법원 2017.07.21 2017노15

-서울고등법원 2017.06.15 2017노594

-서울고등법원 2017.12.21 2017노2727

-서울고등법원 2018.11.15 2018노1682