logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 (춘천) 2020.05.20 2019노182
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(장애인준강간)
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is true that the defendant has a sexual intercourse with the victim at the time and place of the entry of the facts constituting a crime, but it is conducted under the affirmative demand or consent of the victim.

The victim does not have a mental disorder to the extent that he/she is unable to exercise his/her right to sexual self-determination, and even if so, there was an objective mental disorder.

Even though the defendant did not recognize the mental disorder of the victim, there was no intention of quasi-rape.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (five years of imprisonment and forty hours of order to complete sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court determined that: (a) the following circumstances that can be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the evidence as indicated in the judgment of the lower court, namely, ① the victim is a disabled person of class 2 with intellectual disability, and the concept of the number and time seems to be unclear and difficult to communicate; (b) the crime committed by the Defendant is committed in a situation where the victim is difficult to hear the support from the surrounding area; and (c) the victim’s statement appears to have not clearly expressed his/her intent of refusal even when he/she feel disconsure with the Defendant and the victim’s sexual relation; and (d) the victim’s exercise of sexual self-determination is difficult

In addition, the lower court may comprehensively consider the following circumstances, namely, ① the victim was unable to resist or resist because it is difficult for the victim to exercise his/her right to sexual self-determination as seen earlier, ② the Defendant was aware that he/she had a mental disorder with the ordinary victim while residing in the neighbor of the victim, ③ all of the crimes are difficult for the victim to seek the support of the surrounding area.

arrow