logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2018.02.02 2016노2459
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(공중밀집장소에서의추행)
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The main point of the grounds of appeal (misunderstanding of facts) is that the victim’s legal statement and the statement made by the police are only natural phenomena due to the limitation of memory, and the major parts of the statement are fully believed to be consistent. However, the court below, even though the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone, proves that the facts charged in the instant case are beyond a reasonable doubt.

The court below acquitted the defendant on the ground that it is difficult to see it, and erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

가. 이 사건 공소사실의 요지 피고인은 2016. 3. 11. 07:53 경 서울 강서구 공항대로 631 부근을 지나던 지하철 9호 선 염창 역에서 당산 역 방향 전동차 내에서 혼잡한 틈을 이용하여 C( 여, 29세) 의 등 뒤에 몸을 밀착시킨 다음, C의 엉덩이에 자신의 성기를 비볐다.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the victim in the electric car, which is a place where the public is concentrated.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the lower court determined that: (a) at the time of the instant case, the Defendant was faced with the body of the Defendant at the time of the instant case during the subway 9’s moving from the subway base to the subway station; (b) there was a space where the Defendant was able to move to the following; (c) but there was a space where the Defendant was able to move to the lower court even though there was a large number of people inside the train; (d) on the other hand, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., (e., (i) there is a somewhat difference between the Defendant’s legal statement and the investigative agency’s statement, and (ii) it is difficult to credibility

In full view of the fact that the Defendant and C were made a statement due to other causes, and (3) the inside situation of the previous car with the Defendant at the time, the evidence presented by the Prosecutor alone is written in the facts charged.

arrow