(영문) 대전지방법원 2016.06.15 2016노25 | 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 2016노25

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(공중밀집장소에서의추행)

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant is not guilty of committing an indecent act against the victim.

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

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million, and an order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, i.e., ① the victim was consistently made from the investigative agency to the court of the court below at the time of the instant case by making soup from male-friendly appearance F, which was on the left side of the court below.

The defendant was close to the extent that he can see the sensses that she can her her her her her butt, by taking advantage of his her her her her her butt on hand or by his her her her her hand, and the defendant was able to her own at this place.

The statement (55-56 pages of the trial record) and 2. The victim's male-child arrest F at the time is consistent with investigative agency to the court of original trial, and was left from the injured person.

He heard the word that she was her her butt, reported the Defendant who was placed on the left side of the victim, and immediately made an objection, and the Defendant was able to make soup at the soup room, and on the part of the Defendant, she did not fry the Defendant’s eye and continued to keep the Defendant in compliance with the soup.

The statement (66 pages of the trial record), 3. The victim and the above F accurately considered the face of the defendant at the time of the original trial.

The statement was made by describing the face that can be seen as the defendant (58,69 pages of the trial record), ④ the victim’s statement and the above F’s statement that the witness appeared is consistent, consistent, very specific, and consistent with each other; ⑤ at the time of the statement

CCTV also sees the part of the victim's arms and traw.

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2012.11.29 2012노4445

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.01.15 2015노4308

-대구지방법원 2020.02.06 2019노2251

-대전고등법원 (청주) 2017.02.16 2016노197

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.06 2017노4446