beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. On May 28, 2014, at around 16:57 to 16:59 on May 28, 2014, the Defendant: (a) was going to the front of the new village apartment apartment shopping district, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon; (b) was going to the front of the new village apartment apartment shopping district; and (c) the victim C (V, 13) was getting off the front of the old apartment apartment apartment shopping district from the old apartment apartment shopping district to the front of the new village apartment apartment shopping district in the same school-friendly district.
When the defendant gets up the above school, discovered the behavior of the victim, and passed before the victim's day, he saw him to take up his sexual organ at his seat and walked with him.
Accordingly, the Defendant publicly committed an obscene act.
2. The Defendant and his defense counsel’s assertion entered the date, time, and place indicated in the facts charged in the instant case, as well as whether the knife and fixed devices were destroyed at the time and place. However, as a result, there was a little natural behavior in the process of raising the knife on the wind, and there was no patently obscene act by leaving the victim’s sexual organ.
3. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial for judgment is to be borne by a public prosecutor, and the conviction is to be based on the evidence of probative value that makes a judge feel true beyond a reasonable doubt. Thus, if there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt is between the defendant, even if there is no such evidence.
Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.
(2) The main evidence supporting the instant facts charged against the Defendant, which was duly adopted and investigated by the court, is the evidence, and there is a visual CCTV image. On the other hand, the prosecutor applied for the written statement of the victim C as evidence, but the Defendant did not consent thereto, and even if the prosecutor applied for the said C as a witness, the said C was summoned several times.