logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2016.04.26 2015노3495
강제추행
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant is guilty of facts, and the victim has a sense of view to the defendant.

I think of it, without the intention to commit an indecent act, there is only a fact that the victim was forced to commit an indecent act, such as the facts stated in the judgment of the court below, by putting the victim on the bed and walking on one hand the victim's chest.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of the execution of two years, the community service order 120 hours, and the order to attend a sexual assault treatment lecture 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court as to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant’s indecent act by force against the victim as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the lower judgment may be recognized.

1) The victim made a statement from an investigative agency to an investigation agency to the court that corresponds to the facts stated in the judgment of the court below, and such statement is specific and consistent.

In light of the contents of H message sent and received between the Defendant and the victim after the instant crime, the victim’s statement is credibility.

2) The Defendant and the victim completed a meeting on December 1, 2014, and drinking alcohol, and had been under the influence of alcohol, but there was a difference between the two parties until the previous year. At that time, the Defendant and the victim did not have been friendly even until the 16th day of the same month, which was the day of the instant crime, or did not have been friendly, or the Defendant did not have been able to misunderstand the victim’s relationship with the victim as a year-based relationship. In addition, the Defendant and the victim demanded a apology on the instant telecom case on a rooftop by the Defendant, and the Defendant had her frighted the victim with respect to the said telecom case. The Defendant was frighted against the victim.

3) The Defendant, on December 18, 2014, concluded that “dysium pathy” was fixed to the victim.

arrow