A. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (a minor indecent act under thirteen years of age)

(b) Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes;

(c) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse;

(d) Violation of the Child Welfare Act (intermedial, sexual harassment, etc. against a child);

A

Prosecutor

Attorney Park Sung-sung, Song-sung, Park Jong-tae, Park Jong-tae

Seoul High Court Decision 2019No175 Decided December 20, 2019

June 11, 2020

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

Article 307 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "the acknowledgement of facts shall be based on evidence" in paragraph (1) as the title of "the principle of judgement of evidence", and Article 307 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "the recognition of facts should be made to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt" in paragraph (2). Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that "The probative value of evidence shall be based on the free judgment of the judge," as the title of "the principle of free evaluation

The burden of proving the facts constituting an offense prosecuted in a criminal trial requires proof of probative value, which makes it possible for a judge to believe that the facts charged are true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt. Therefore, if there is no steam, even if there is doubt as to the Defendant’s guilt, it is inevitable to determine the Defendant not guilty as the benefit of the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do4737, Feb. 24, 2006; 2017Do12649, Dec. 22, 2017).

The lower court acquitted the Defendant on the charges of this case on the ground that there was no proof of crime.

Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

The presiding Justice shall mobilization by the presiding Justice

Justices Kim Jae-sik in charge

Justices Min Min-young

Justices Noh Tae-ok