(영문) 광주고등법원 2015.09.10 2015노207 | 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) 광주고등법원 2015.09.10 2015노207

준강간미수등

Text

Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The lower court found Defendant 1 guilty of all the facts charged of this case on the sole basis of the statements made by the victim without credibility. Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on erroneous sentencing, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. (2) The lower court’s judgment on the ground of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment and four years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. It is improper for the court below to exempt the defendant from the order of disclosure and notification of personal information of the defendant, although there are no special circumstances that the defendant's punishment sentenced by the court below is too unfasible and unfair, and the defendant's personal information should not be disclosed or notified.

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) on March 12, 2014, the Defendant: (b) at around 24:00, the Defendant: (a) went on the right side of the victim (the victim’s age 23) and forced the victim to commit quasi-rape; (c) on September 9, 2014, the Defendant attempted to commit quasi-rape; (d) on September 19, 2014, the Defendant, while drunkly drunk at G bank located in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, Seo-gu, Gwangju, to put the victim into the part of the victim’s drinking, and she was unable to resist by inserting his or her sexual organ into the victim’s sexual organ, thereby inducing the victim to commit rape; (e) on the other hand, the Defendant attempted to commit quasi-rape; (e) on the other hand, the Defendant did not commit rape.

B. The lower court’s determination 1 of the lower court is consistent from the investigative agency to the instant court that the Defendant had consistently stated that the victim had her her tmd with the victim, and that the victim’s her tmd with the victim’s tmd with the victim at the time when the victim’s her tmd is unknown unless the victim’s her tmd

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 2015.03.20 2014고합623

-서울서부지방법원 2019.02.12 2018고합316

-광주지방법원 2019.08.23 2019고합184

-서울고등법원 2015.04.24 2015노305

-서울중앙지방법원 2013.12.18 2013고합1000