beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) The misunderstanding of facts and the misapprehension of legal principles are only the fact that the victim and the head of the fire station in front of the fire station as indicated on the day of each of the crimes of this case suffered a little degree of injury to the victim in the course of the wind that the victim and the head of the fire station go beyond the chemical team with the victim, and there is no fact that the victim committed an indecent act before the fire station and the head of the victim's office as acknowledged by the court below.
However, the court below relied only on the statements made by the victim who is difficult to believe that the defendant was forced to commit an indecent act or indecent act by force. In so doing, the court below erred by misunderstanding facts or misapprehending the legal principles on forced indecent act.
2) At the time of each of the instant crimes with mental disorder, the Defendant, under the influence of alcohol, was in a state of mental disorder with or without the ability to discern things or make decisions.
3) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (three years of suspended sentence on the two and a half years of imprisonment) is too heavy.
B. A prosecutor 1) In relation to a crime in the fire department of a misunderstanding fire station, in light of the Defendant’s speech and behavior that was seen before and after the commission of the crime, the crime is based on the criminal intent of rape, and should be held liable for the crime resulting from rape, such as the primary charge, in relation to the crime.
However, the court below rejected the statement on this part of the victim sufficient credibility, and merely asked only the charge of causing bodily injury resulting from forced indecent acts according to the preliminary facts charged. In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles.
2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too minor.
2. Determination
A. 1) As to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles, the probative value of evidence is left to a judge’s free judgment, but such judgment must be in accordance with logical and empirical rules, and the conviction is found in a criminal trial.