logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 (춘천) 2018.07.04 2018노34
강간치상등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The lower court sentenced guilty of rape, bodily injury, or special intimidation among the facts charged in the instant case, and dismissed the public prosecution regarding intimidation. The prosecutor appealed the remainder of the lower judgment, excluding the dismissed part of the lower court’s judgment.

Therefore, the dismissal of the public prosecution for which an appeal has not been filed is separated and confirmed as it is, it is excluded from the scope of adjudication.

2. The defense counsel with the gist of the grounds of appeal asserted as the ground of appeal on the ground of mistake of the facts concerning the crime of injury resulting from rape under Paragraph (2) of the judgment below, misunderstanding of the legal principles concerning special intimidation under Paragraph (3) of the judgment below, and misunderstanding of the sentencing on the guilty portion of the judgment below, but withdrawn the allegation of mistake on the first trial date of this court.

A. Error 1 of the legal doctrine on special intimidation under Paragraph 3 of the holding, which affected the Defendant’s failure to voluntarily attend the wall, and did not notify the victim of harm.

2) The crime of special intimidation under Paragraph 1 of the holding and Paragraph 3 of the same Article is close to time, the place is identical, and the criminal intent is a single crime due to the act arising from the dispute between the defendant and the victim, and thus, it shall be deemed a single crime.

B. The sentence of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles on special intimidation under Article 3 of the holding, in order to establish a crime of intimidation, the harm and injury notified should be generally deemed sufficient to cause fear to the person in light of various circumstances before and after the act, such as the tendency of the actor and the other party, surrounding circumstances at the time of notification, and the relationship between the perpetrator and the other party, such as the degree of friendship and status. However, the other party is not required to feel feel realistically, and the harm and injury to such an extent is not required.

arrow