logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2016.02.17 2015노2409
특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(약취ㆍ유인)등
Text

Of the part of the case against Defendant A of the lower judgment, the guilty part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A. This case against A

Reasons

With respect to the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse by Defendant and Defendant A (hereinafter “Defendant”) as well as the person who requested an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”), the summary of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) although Defendant A had only stated the victim H several times, Defendant A did not have sexual intercourse itself; and (b) the victim M attempted to have sexual intercourse with Defendant A voluntarily under mutual agreement; (c) Defendant A attempted to have sexual intercourse with Defendant A due to his/her failure to cause sexual intercourse; and (d) Defendant A did not have sexual intercourse.

Even according to the statement of the victim M, Defendant A did not have any fact of assault or intimidation against the victim M to the effect that he was forced to engage in sexual traffic by E, and otherwise, Defendant A was unable or difficult to resist due to rape after the victim M was induced to China by E at the time.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on mistake of facts and assault and intimidation in the crime of rape, which found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged by the statement of the above victims without credibility.

The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant A (five years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

With respect to Defendant A’s violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes (Kidnapping and abduction) and the inducement for profit, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the charges of this part of the Defendant A, on the ground that Defendant A’s testimony is consistent and apparent as the fact that most of the statements made by Defendant B were directly experienced, and thus, it is not reliable, and thereby acquitted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged.

The court below's decision of sentencing is unfair.

arrow