beta
Text
Defendant
All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) 1 misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles - The guilty part was understood by the victims about the drone 1002 from the victims or did not so, there was no perception that the Defendant was committed against the victims’ will. In addition, there was no fact that the Defendant delivered the chest of the victim G. Nevertheless, there was an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles that found the Defendant guilty of each of the charges on the grounds of the statements made by the victims with no credibility. 2) The sentence of imprisonment (two years and six months, and four years of suspension of execution) imposed by the court below on the Defendant is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor 1) 1 misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles - The Defendant’s acquittal part on the part of not-guilty part on the part of the victim G on his guest room was an assault to such an extent as to make it difficult to resist, and thus, the scope of rape is recognized. Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, which is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles. 2) Punishment sentenced by the lower court of unfair sentencing (two years and six months of imprisonment, and four years of suspended sentence
2. Determination
A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court also asserted the same purport as the above grounds for appeal, and the lower court, under the title “judgment on the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion”
(a) through (c);
In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is justified, and the defendant's assertion of mistake is without merit. The defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is without merit.
In addition, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to the actual chip entry, are the following circumstances, i.e., victim G, the police.