(영문) 서울고등법원 2020.06.10 2020노37 | 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) 서울고등법원 2020.06.10 2020노37

감금치상등

Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant's defense counsel submitted the appeal period after the deadline for submitting the appeal grounds is examined to the extent of supplement in case of legitimate grounds for appeal.

1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (crimes 2019, 287) A) the Defendant only limited to a case where the Defendant returned 200,000 won of the price for sexual traffic delivered to the victim to the victim or prevented the victim from leaving the victim in the hotel room to get up until the police get up to the victim. Thus, the Defendant’s act does not constitute confinement, and there was no intention to detain the

B) Even if the Defendant’s act constitutes an act of confinement, it is a justifiable act, and thus there is no illegality in accordance with Article 20 of the Criminal Act. C) The injury inflicted on the victim is not caused by the Defendant’

2) The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair. B. The prosecutor (the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant of unjust sentencing) is too unreasonable and unfair.

2. Judgment on the mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles by the defendant

A. In full view of the victim, G, and the Defendant’s statement, etc., the lower court determined that the Defendant’s use of considerable tangible force, such as cutting the victim’s clothes, breaths, etc., and cutting off or cutting off the wall, thereby preventing the victim from leaving the hotel room, and that it constitutes an act of confinement. 2) In addition to the circumstances revealed by the lower court’s duly adopted and investigated evidence, the lower court additionally added the following circumstances revealed by the evidence revealed by the lower court to prevent the Defendant from leaving the hotel room, and sufficiently recognized the Defendant’s intent to detain the victim.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is just and it is alleged by the defendant.

참조조문

-형법 제20조

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2018.04.19 2018노89

-대구고등법원 2018.01.18 2017노479

-대법원 1991. 12. 30. 자 91모5 결정

-대법원 1994. 3. 16. 자 94모2 결정

-서울고등법원 2016.06.24 2016노734