(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.02.06 2014노3496 | 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 2015.02.06 2014노3496

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(특수강도강간등)등

Text

The judgment below

The part of the case of the defendant is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for ten years.

. against the Defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The fact that the Defendant and the person against whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter “Defendant”) had a knife with the intent of robbery, but only the Defendant attempted to rape the victim without the commencement of robbery.

The defendant only demanded the victim to engage in sex relations after dancing, but did not demand that the victim be involved in money and valuables.

Nevertheless, there is an error of misunderstanding of facts in the judgment of the court below which recognized that the defendant tried to rape after the commission of robbery and attempted to commit robbery.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (15 years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

C. It is improper for the lower court to set the period of the disclosure and notification order to the Defendant as 10 years.

It is improper for the court below to set the period of the attachment order to the defendant for 20 years.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the key issue in this part of the judgment of the court below is that the defendant led to a confession of the facts charged in the court of the court below, but tried to rape against the victim without commencing the robbery as described in Section 1-A of the above 1-A. The defendant also has a knife with robbery, and that he threatened the victim with the knife. As such, the key issue in this case is whether the defendant "the defendant has a criminal intent to commit robbery" at the time when the defendant initiates intimidation with the knife for the victim, and the defendant's credibility of the confession is different from the defendant's statement in the court of first instance, it cannot be said that the probative value or credibility of the confession is doubtful solely on the ground that the confession in the court of first instance differs from the defendant's statement in the appellate court. In determining the credibility of the confession, the statement of confession is made.

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2014.08.01 2014노1594

-서울고등법원 2020.05.21 2020노162

-서울고등법원 2013.02.21 2012노4044

-서울남부지방법원 2019.02.14 2018노1216

-서울고등법원 (춘천) 2015.08.12 2015노100