The case holding that the defendant was acquitted on the ground that the victim's statement made by the defendant was not reliable.

The case finding the defendant not guilty on the ground that the victim's statement that the defendant and the victim's family members were forced to commit indecent act by compulsion is not reliable in light of the following: (a) the defendant and the victim's family members were able to sleep together in the same room; (b) the victim's complaint was made in excess of the defendant's month; (c) the victim's complaint was made; and (d) the victim's statement that the victim was forced to commit indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by indecent act by the defendant was different from the defendant's pen.

Article 8-2 (2) of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims Thereof, and Article 298 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Kim Young-il

Attorney Name-ho

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of the facts charged and the defendant's assertion

The summary of the facts charged of this case is as follows: (a) around 06:00 on August 2, 2004, the defendant expressed that the victim Nonindicted Party 1 (the age of 12) was locked in the private house in the vicinity of the Gambucka-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Taenam-gun, Taenam-gun, by reporting that the victim Nonindicted Party 1 (the age of 12) was locked; and (b) caused the knife the knife to the knife by the knife on the knife's hand, the knife, the knife, the knife, the knife and the k

2. Determination:

A. Therefore, the evidence as shown in the facts charged in the instant case includes (1) Nonindicted 1’s statement in this court, Nonindicted 1’s statement in this court, Nonindicted 1’s statement in the preparation of the judicial police assistant, the part in which Nonindicted 1’s statement in the protocol of interrogation of the accused in the preparation of the judicial police assistant, Nonindicted 2’s statement in this court, Nonindicted 2’s statement in the protocol of interrogation of the protocol of interrogation of the judicial police assistant, Nonindicted 2’s statement in this court, Nonindicted 3’s statement in this court, Nonindicted 3’s statement in this court, Nonindicted 3’s statement in the protocol of interrogation of the protocol of interrogation of the judicial police assistant, Nonindicted 4’s statement in this court, Nonindicted 4’s statement in this court, Nonindicted 4’s statement in the preparation of the judicial police assistant, and (5) diagnosis of Nonindicted 1’s statement attached to the investigation report in the judicial police assistant(s).

B. First, with respect to the statement from Nonindicted 1’s investigative agency to this court, it is the purport that the Defendant, along with Nonindicted 1’s relative with Nonindicted 1 including Nonindicted 1, committed an indecent act as to Nonindicted 1, as in the facts charged, among the Dos in which the Defendant was able to play at the private house, with Nonindicted 1’s relative at the school, etc.

그런데 (1) 위 증거들에 의하면, 피고인은 평소 공소외 1의 이모인 공소외 3이 운영하는 노래방에 자주 놀러가면서 공소외 3과 친하게 지내다가, 공소외 3의 가족들 및 노래방 종업원들과 함께 공소외 3의 친정집 부근의 서해로 여름휴가를 같이 가게 되어, 2004. 7. 31. 공소외 3 등 일행과 함께 공소외 3의 친정집에 도착하여 그 곳에서 하룻밤을 묵고, 다음날 오후 공소외 3의 가족 4명( 공소외 3, 공소외 3의 남편, 공소외 3의 자녀 2명), 공소외 3의 동생 공소외 5, 공소외 1, 공소외 1의 남동생, 공소외 1의 외사촌, 노래방 직원인 공소외 2, 공소외 6과 함께 학암포해수욕장으로 가서 물놀이를 하고 난 후 저녁식사를 마치고 어른들끼리 술도 같이 하는 등으로 즐겁게 시간을 보낸 후 위 일행들 11명이 다 같이 공소사실 기재 장소인 민박집 방에서 함께 잠을 자게 된 사실을 인정할 수 있는바, 위와 같이 피고인이 공소외 1과 함께 잠을 자게 된 경위와 함께 당시 피고인이 공소외 1 뿐 아니라 일행들과 함께 같은 방에서 자고 있었고, 더구나 그 일행 대부분이 공소외 1의 친척들이었기 때문에 피고인이 공소외 1을 추행하였다면 공소외 1이 소리치거나 그 주변 가족들에게 도움을 요청하는 등으로 그 행위가 쉽게 발각되었을 것임에도 당시 이와 같은 일이 없었던 점에 비추어 보면, 피고인이 공소외 1을 공소사실 기재와 같이 추행하였다는 것은 선뜻 납득하기 어렵고, (2) 또한 위 증거들에 의하면, 피고인은 위와 같이 공소외 1 등과 함께 잠을 잔 이후 일행들과 함께 위 해수욕장에서 물놀이도 하고 공소외 3의 친정집으로 돌아와서는 놀이동산에도 갔다가 그 집에서 하룻밤을 더 묵고, 그 다음날 공소외 3 등과 같이 돌아오는 등으로 피고인과 공소외 1, 그리고 다른 일행들은 별다른 문제없이 즐거운 시간을 보내고 돌아온 사실, 위 여행을 다녀온 후 한 달여가 지난 2004. 9. 8. 위 공소외 1의 외갓집에서 외할머니의 침대구석에서 공소외 1의 팬티와 브래지어가 발견되었다고 하여 공소외 1의 집으로 소포로 보내주었는데, 그 속옷에는 음란한 내용의 낙서가 가득 적혀있어, 공소외 1의 어머니인 공소외 4가 공소외 1에게 자초지종을 물어보자, 공소외 1이 비로소 공소사실과 같이 피고인으로부터 추행을 당한 사실이 있다고 밝혀 이에 공소외 4가 2004. 9. 13. 경찰서에 이 사건으로 피고인을 고소한 사실, 피고인은 수사기관 이래 이와 같은 낙서를 한 사실이 없다고 부인하였고, 국립과학연구소의 필적감정 결과 위 속옷 낙서의 필적과 피고인의 필적은 상이한 것으로 확인된 사실 등을 인정할 수 있는바, 공소외 1이 피고인으로부터 공소사실과 같은 추행을 당하였으면서도 이후 한 달여간 이에 대하여 아무런 이의제기가 없다가 이와 전혀 무관한 위 속옷의 낙서에 대하여 자신의 어머니로부터 추궁을 당하자 피고인이 자신을 추행한 사실을 고백하였다는 점과 정작 이 사건 고소의 발단이 된 위 공소외 1의 속옷에 낙서를 피고인이 하였다고 인정할 만한 아무런 증거가 없고 오히려 제3자가 했을 가능성이 있는 점 등에 비추어 보면, 공소외 1이 피해사실을 꾸미거나 과장되게 진술하였을 가능성도 배제하기 어렵다. (3) 따라서 공소외 1의 공소사실에 부합하는 취지의 위 진술은 이를 그대로 믿기 어렵다.

C. From the investigation agency of Nonindicted Party 2 to this court, the contents of Nonindicted Party 2’s statement were either 04:0 to 05:00 the day on which the above facts charged were stated, and around 0:0, the Defendant opened a visit to ascertain why he had come to the above public house because he did not have been playing outside the above public house, and at the time, he was living on the side of Nonindicted Party 1. However, it is difficult to conclude that Nonindicted Party 1 again opened the above public house and made it difficult to conclude that the Defendant was able to see that he was able to see that the Defendant was unsatisfy, and that Nonindicted Party 1 was satisfy, and that he was posted again from Nonindicted Party 1 to 07:0 (at the investigation agency, Nonindicted Party 1 stated that he was 0 to 06:30, and that he was able to see that he was satisfy and that he was an indecent act again by the Defendant for his own sake.

D. In addition, the contents of Nonindicted 3’s statement are merely that the Defendant took care of Nonindicted 1’s side at the above private house. Nonindicted 4’s statement made from Nonindicted 1 that the content of Nonindicted 4’s indecent act as described in the above facts charged was committed against Nonindicted 1, and thus, Nonindicted 1’s statement is not reliable as above. As such, it is insufficient to recognize the above facts charged on the sole basis of each of the above statements. The written diagnosis of Nonindicted 1 attached to the investigation report (as stated in the Investigation Record No. 24) prepared by the judicial police assistant is insufficient to recognize the above facts charged.

3. Conclusion

Thus, the facts charged in this case constitute a case where there is no evidence to prove the crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Judges Kim Jong-chul (Presiding Judge)