(영문) 부산고등법원 2017.05.25 2016노763 | 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) 부산고등법원 2017.05.25 2016노763

미성년자의제강간등

Text

The judgment below

Of them, the part concerning the defendant and the person who requested the attachment order shall be reversed.

Defendant

(b).

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The part of the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Acts by Forced Minor Offenders under 13 years of age), which was found guilty at the lower court, was committed by the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”), and there was no intention to force the victim to commit an indecent act after threatening the victim by threateninging the victim at the time of committing the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Acts by Forced Minor Offenders under 13 years of age).

Defendant

B’s text message sent to the victim cannot be deemed as a threat of the crime of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Conduct by Minor Offenders under the age of 13), i.e., the victim’s resistance difficult (in addition, the lower court did not contain the content that the Defendant would know about the sexual relationship with the victim to a third party on August 13, 2015) in light of the details and details of the sending of the message, etc. However, the lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of a violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent Conduct by Minor Offenders under the age of 13), thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B) Each text message in the holding of the lower judgment, which Defendant B sent to the victim, cannot be deemed as intimidation in light of the developments leading up to and details of the transmission, and there was no intention to inform Defendant B of the fact of the sexual relationship with the victim to a third party.

Nevertheless, the court below found all of the charges guilty. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles of intimidation, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B (two years and six months, etc. of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

참조조문

-성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법

유사 판례

-부산고등법원 2016.03.30 2016노24

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.06.07 2018고합41

-의정부지방법원 2018.05.24 2018고합48

-창원지방법원 진주지원 2018.05.17 2018고합43

-울산지방법원 2021.01.22 2020고합329