logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2017.04.20 2016고합240
청소년의성보호에관한법률위반
Text

The prosecution of this case is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The facts charged in this case

A. On May 1, 200, the Defendant: (a) around 18:00 on May 1, 2009, 19: (b) around 18:00, at the Defendant’s house located in C2 level, pushed away to the Defendant D (V, 16 years of age) of the Defendant’s body and pushed down the Defendant’s body behind the Defendant’s body; (c) and (d) met the victim’s chest, vessel, and her part with the Defendant’s left hand.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the juvenile victim by force.

B. From the date of entry in paragraph 1, the Defendant: (a) up to 20:00, after the date of entry in paragraph 1, the injured person was tightly creshed by the victim in the above place; (b) carried the victim’s body by creshing the victim’s body back to the victim after the victim’s cresh, etc.; and (c) carried the hand into the brode of the victim’s brode; and (d) carried the hand into the victim’s panty; and (e) took the part into the victim’s panty, and (e) took the part in

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the juvenile victim by force.

(c)

On the day following the date specified in paragraph 2, the Defendant scamed to the victim who was scam in the main line of the above place, and scamed to the victim after the victim's body was pushed back after the victim's body was pushed back, scamd to the victim's chest.

Accordingly, the defendant committed an indecent act against the juvenile victim by force.

2. We examine the judgment. The facts charged in the instant case are crimes falling under Article 7(2) of the former Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (wholly amended by Act No. 9765, Jun. 9, 2009; hereinafter the same) and Article 298 of the Criminal Act, and cannot be prosecuted against the victim’s express intent pursuant to the proviso to Article 16 and subparagraph 1 of the former Act on the Protection of Juveniles against Sexual Abuse. According to the records, a written agreement was formulated between the defendant and the defendant that the victim D who has attained majority want not to punish the defendant on April 12, 2017, after the prosecution of the instant case, and the defendant submitted the said agreement to this court on April 12, 2017.

arrow