logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.11.09 2018고단3818
강제추행
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person subject to the Korea-U.S. Administrative Agreement (SOFA) as a U.S. national soldier.

On May 4, 2018, around 20:55, the Defendant her walked along along the way near the bus stops (stop number E) in front of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building at one time, and her walked around the victim F (M, 23 years old) who was walking before the Defendant.

Accordingly, the Defendant committed an indecent act on the part of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness F;

1. A written statement of F and G;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. 112 Handling of reported cases;

1. An investigation report (integrated analysis compiled) - On-site CCTV CDs;

1. Application of the provisions of this Act and the Acts and subordinate statutes concerning the compilation of data concerning CCTV images and field maps;

1. The pertinent Article of the Criminal Act, Article 298 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime (indecent act by force), and the choice of imprisonment [the victim] continued to put the perpetrator immediately after the victim was injured, followed by taking a video recording to put him/her up immediately after the victim was damaged, and then the police dispatched immediately after his/her position assigned to the police as the perpetrator.

In light of such land category process, it seems that there is no possibility that the victim could confuse the perpetrator.

On the other hand, the defense counsel stated in the statement that the injured male who suffered the “marts” was a sear, and that the injured person was mistakenly identified the Defendant on the ground that the injured person was “H” rather than the Defendant.

However, the victim stated in the written statement that he was the person who suffered from the “T-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S-S

arrow