(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.06.15 2015노2480 | 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) 대전지방법원 2016.06.15 2015노2480

강제추행

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the Defendant did not look at the part under the part of the victim’s ear, and did not cover the part of the victim’s her mack with her macker, and her mack with the victim’s macker was merely an act in a trial decision, and did not intend to commit an indecent act.

On the other hand, the defendant's part of the victim was limited.

The act constitutes an indecent act

(2) No act may be deemed to be an act of coercion or coercion.

However, the lower court found the Defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and misunderstanding of facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the amount of KRW 5 million, the amount of KRW 40 million, and the amount of KRW 40,000) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles: ① The victim, from the investigative agency to the court of the court below, she saw her part of her part of her part by hand, her part of her part by hand, and her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her part

As the statement is made, its contents are consistent and very specific, ② The victim, along with her husband, retired from the company on the same day after the date when her husband found the company and brought an issue about the defendant’s action. However, this is the fact that the victim stated that he was uneasible and uneasible due to the defendant (the 13th page of the investigation record), ③ The victim’s retirement from the company does not seem to make a false statement even after her retirement from the company. ④ The victim is more than the defendant’s additional strawle that uses only one person from the investigative agency to the court of original trial.

유사 판례

-대전지방법원 천안지원 2015.07.21 2015고단289

-서울고등법원 2016.09.22 2016노1853

-인천지방법원 2016.07.21 2015고단8435

-대전지방법원 2017.10.25 2017노990

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.09.09 2016노1129