(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.11.24 2020노250 | 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) 광주지방법원 2020.11.24 2020노250

아동복지법위반(아동에대한음행강요ㆍ매개ㆍ성희롱등)

Text

All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (De facto misunderstanding, misunderstanding of legal principles, and unreasonable sentencing) did not engage in sexual abuse, such as sexual harassment, which causes a sense of sexual humiliation to the victim E, victim F, victim G, and victim J.

In addition, the act of making the part of the victim H's shoulder and elbow part 5 to 6 times is difficult to be considered as sexual harassment that causes a sense of sexual humiliation to the victim.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, which led the victims to sexual harassment as stated in the facts charged.

Even if not, the punishment of the court below (the fine of KRW 5,00,000, the order to complete a sexual assault treatment program 40 hours, and the restriction on employment of child and juvenile-related institutions and welfare facilities for the disabled) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The lower court determined that the victim’s statement was credibility in the victim’s statement, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the Defendant’s assertion of mistake and misapprehension of the legal doctrine: (a) the victims reported the damage to the school building and the person concerned immediately after the damage was inflicted on September 6, 2018, which was the date of each of the instant crimes; (b) the victims’ statement to investigation agency on September 8, 2018, which was subsequent to the formation of the crime; (c) the victims’ statement was detailed, detailed, contradictory, or unreasonable parts; (d) the victims’ statement was presented to the victims’ statement; (c) the victims’ statement was presented that there was credibility in the victim’s statement; and (d) the victims’ statement that the victims first made a statement that there was concern that the victims might have suffered another victim’s act.

In addition, the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence are as follows:

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2015.11.27 2015노1936

-서울고등법원 2018.03.06 2017노2831

-부산지방법원 2017.04.19 2016고단7694

-서울남부지방법원 2016.04.21 2015고합559

-수원고등법원 2020.04.29 2020노25