2020Do9660 A. Bodily Injury

(b) Forced;

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

Use photography)

(d) Damage to property;

(e) Intimidation;

A

Both parties

Attorney Yu Young-jin

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2019No2877 Decided July 2, 2020

October 15, 2020

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Prosecutor’s Grounds of Appeal

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment which acquitted the Defendant on the charge of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes among the instant charges by deeming that there was no proof of crime. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the record, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of a crime of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning

2. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal

Although examining the record, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the method of legitimate appeal, scope of appellate trial, etc. in the judgment of the court of first instance on the premise that the prosecutor presented the grounds for appeal of unfair sentencing as to the judgment of the court of first instance, and sentenced a sentence heavier than that of the court of first instance.

The argument that there was an error of mistake of facts in the lower judgment’s incomplete deliberation on the grounds for sentencing favorable to the Defendant constitutes an allegation of unfair sentencing. However, under Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for not less than ten years has been imposed. In this case where the Defendant was sentenced to a more minor punishment, the argument that the punishment

3. Conclusion

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

Justices Lee Dong-gu

Justices Lee Ki-taik

Justices Park Jung-hwa

Justices Kim Jong-soo