(영문) 울산지방법원 2020.12.11.선고 2020노551 판결

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000. Where the Defendant fails to pay the above fine, the Defendant shall be confined in the workhouse for a period calculated by converting KRW 100,000 into one day.

The defendant shall be ordered to complete 40 hours of sexual assault treatment programs. An order to pay a reasonable amount of the fine shall be issued.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

피고인에게 강제추행의 고의가 없었고, 피고인의 오른손이 피해자의 왼뺨에 닿지 않았으며, 설령 피고인의 오른손이 피해자의 왼뺨에 닿았더라도 이를 추행으로 볼 수 없음에도 이를 간과한 채 이 사건 주위적 공소사실을 유죄로 인정한 원심판결에는 사실오인 및 법리오해로 판결에 영향을 미친 위법이 있다.

B. Unreasonable sentencing

The sentence of the lower court (the fine of 5 million won, the order to complete a program 40 hours, the employment restriction period of 3 years) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The judgment of the court below

원심은 그 판시 증거들에 의하여, 피해자는 1999년생 여자로 피고인과는 전혀 일면 식도 없는 사이인 사실, 피고인은 일행과 함께 다른 식탁에 앉아 있던 피해자에게 갑자기 다가와 한쪽 손으로 피해자의 왼쪽 뺨을 접촉하고 피해자를 감싸 안으려고 하며 귓속말을 하려고 한 사실, 이때 피고인은 피해자 귀 바로 옆까지 자신의 얼굴을 들이 댄 사실, 그 즉시 피해자가 놀라 뒤로 물러나고 피해자와 함께 있던 이지인(가명)이 피고인의 팔을 잡으며 이를 제지하였고, 이로 인해 피고인 및 피해자, 이지인과 사이에 다툼이 일어난 사실, 당시 피해자는 기분이 나빴고 성적 수치심을 느꼈다고 진술한 사실을 인정한 다음, 위 인정 사실에서 알 수 있는 피해자의 의사, 일면식도 없는 피해자를 상대로 한 위와 같은 피고인의 행위 태양, 이 사건 당시의 객관적 상황 등을 고려해 보면, 피고인의 추행의 고의를 인정할 수 있고, 또한 피고인이 일면식도 없는 피해자를 상대로 갑자기 껴안기 위하여 볼에 손을 대고 얼굴을 귀 바로 옆까지 들이대는 행위는 일반인에게 성적 수치심이나 혐오감을 일으키게 하고 선량한 성적 도덕관념에 반하는 행위이므로 이는 피해자의 성적 자유를 침해하는 행위로서 그 자체로 강제추행 기수에 이른 행위라고 판단하였다.

B. Judgment of the court below

원심 판시와 같은 사정에 더하여 당심 및 원심이 적법하게 채택하여 조사한 증거에 의하여 알 수 있는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 피해자는 이 사건 범행 직후 경찰에 '성추행 이 일어났다'고 신고한 점, 피해자는 최초 수사기관에서부터 원심 법정에 이르기까지 일관하여 피고인의 오른손이 피해자의 왼뺨에 스치듯이 닿았다고 진술한 점 등에 비추어 보면, 피고인이 갑자기 피해자를 감싸 안으려 하는 행동을 하는 과정에서 피고인의 오른손이 피해자의 왼뺨에 접촉한 것으로 보이고, 설령 이와 달리 피고인의 손이 피해자의 신체에 닿지 않았다고 하더라도, 생면부지의 피해자를 갑자기 감싸 안는 자세로 피고인의 손을 피해자의 어깨에, 피고인의 얼굴을 피해자의 귀 바로 옆까지 매우 근접시킨 피고인의 행위는 피해자의 의사에 반하는 유형력의 행사로서 그 대소강약 및 접촉 여부와 무관하게 기습추행에서의 폭행행위에 해당하고(대법원 2015. 9. 10. 선고 2015도6980, 2015모2524 판결 참조), 또한 피해자의 의사, 성별, 연령, 피고인과 피해자의 이전부터의 관계, 행위에 이르게 된 경위, 구체적 행위태양, 주위의 객관적 상황

In full view of the sexual morality concept of the times, the above act is sufficient to evaluate that the victim’s sexual freedom has been infringed upon by the act regardless of whether the act causes a sense of sexual shame or aversion to the general public and is in contravention of good sexual morality and actually contacted the victim’s body (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Do13716, Feb. 25, 2010). Thus, it does not interfere with the determination that the indecent act by compulsion in this case has been committed in itself.

For the above reasons, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the primary facts charged of this case is just, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding facts and by misunderstanding the legal principles as to indecent act,

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. Judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing

The fact that the defendant does not reflect his mistake, and that the victim wants to punish the defendant is disadvantageous to the defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the degree of the indecent act in this case is not severe, there is no record of punishment exceeding the fine against the defendant, and the fact that the victim expresses his intention not to punish the defendant to the investigation agency is favorable to the defendant.

In addition, if the defendant's age, character, conduct and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. are considered as a whole and all the sentencing factors in the process of the case and pleading, it is judged that the sentence of the court below is somewhat inappropriate.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is justified.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the appeal by the defendant is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the following is ruled again.

[Grounds for multi-use Judgment]

Criminal facts and summary of evidence

The summary of the facts constituting an offense and the evidence acknowledged by this court is the same as the entries in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and thus, it is quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 298 of the Criminal Code, Selection of Fines

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order to complete programs;

The main sentence of Article 16 (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

1. Exemption from an order for disclosure and notification;

Article 47(1) and the proviso to Article 49(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the proviso to Article 49(1) and the proviso to Article 50(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (in full view of the Defendant’s age, occupation, risk of recidivism, type of crime in this case, motive, process of crime, disclosure order and notification order, the degree of disadvantage and anticipated side effects of the Defendant’s entrance due to the Defendant’s disadvantage and anticipated side effects, prevention of sex crimes subject to registration that may be achieved therefrom, and effects of protecting the victims, it is deemed that there are special circumstances where

1. Exemption from an employment restriction order;

Article 56(1) proviso to Article 56(1) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, Article 2 of the Addenda to Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (Act No. 15904, Dec. 11, 2018), the proviso to Article 59-3(1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (the content and motive of the instant crime, the method and consequence of the crime, the risk of recidivism, the disadvantage suffered by the Defendant due to the employment restriction order, and the prevention effect of sex crimes that may be achieved therefrom, it is deemed that there are special circumstances under which the

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that the same sentence as the order shall be determined in consideration of the sentencing conditions set forth in Article 334(3) above.

Registration of Personal Information

Where a conviction becomes final and conclusive on the facts constituting a crime in the judgment, the defendant is a person subject to registration of personal information pursuant to Article 42(1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes and is obligated to submit personal information to the competent agency pursuant to Article 4