logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 2015.06.18 2015노160
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(친족관계에의한강간)등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months.

Sexual assault against the defendant for 80 hours.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the court below: Defendant 1’s mistake of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles: With the victim’s implied consent, the victim’s sexual intercourse is not rape.

B) Paragraph 2: (2) of the judgment of the court below as of September 22, 2013, there was no fact between the victim and the frighter, and around the 16th day of the same month, around the same day, the frighter and the frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter frighter fright.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the victim guilty on the ground of the victim's statement is erroneous and erroneous.

2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair. (B) Before the month when the Defendant committed an attempted rape on September 16, 2013, which was found not guilty by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant was raped once by the victim; (c) continuously attempted rape against the victim and made indecent act by taking advantage of the circumstances where the Defendant and the victim’s counsel did not express any injury as a concern about the failure of the marriage life between the Defendant and the victim’s child; and (d) the victim’s statement on such circumstance did not believe that it was very specific and consistent; and (e) the victim’s statement on such circumstance did not make the victim resist or remarkably impossible for the victim to resist on the date of the crime.

arrow