(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.05.15 2019고단3

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) 서울서부지방법원 2019.05.15 2019고단3

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(카메라등이용촬영)

Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 20,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, a person who was the Policy Research Institute of the “C Association” located in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, was located in the way that female toilets in the C Association are male toilets, and was able to easily photograph female toilets with the fact that female toilets are opened in the studio, which could easily be taken, using cell phoness to take the damaged female toilets for sexual satisfaction.

1. On March 26, 2018, around 10:55, the Defendant reported that the “C Association of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 27th floor” was female toilets, and that the victim D, who is an employee of the said Association, entered female toilets, entered the said female toilets, and attempted to take the victim, who had reported the baline by inserting a camera in the first roadside partitions, but failed to take a baline photograph and failed to take a baline photograph.

2. On April 9, 2018, the Defendant, at around 14:55, reported that the victim E, an employee of the foregoing Association, entered a female toilet, and attempted to take a cryp to the victim who reported cryp by inserting a camera below the first cryp column, but did not take a cryp to the victim’s cryp and failed to take a cryp to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each legal statement of the witness E, D, and F;

1. Each protocol of the police statement of E and D;

1. Capturing a toilet corridor or CCTV photograph;

1. Video-recording CDs in each toilet corridor;

1. Records of seizure and the list of seizure (34,35 pages);

1. A gene appraisal report;

1. The defendant's assertion of the digital evidence analysis report (A) asserts that there is no evidence as to the fact that the subject of the instant facts charged is the defendant, and that there is only circumstantial evidence, so the defendant is not guilty.

However, in full view of the following facts, it is difficult to see the possibility that the principal agent who committed the above act in a female toilet at the time of the instant case was a person other than the Defendant, and the Defendant committed each of the instant crimes in full view of the Defendant’s act

유사 판례

-광주지방법원 순천지원 2016.11.30 2016고단1458

-수원지방법원 여주지원 2019.03.08 2018고단1193

-인천지방법원 2019.08.29 2019고단2756

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2019.12.18 2019고단2782