In a case where the Defendant, who is a child care teacher, was prosecuted for committing emotional abuse under the Child Welfare Act by making himself/herself feel extreme fear to the degree that the Plaintiff, a child care teacher of the child care center, she was committed by using a cell phone to the son Gap (the third-year age), who was suffering from his/her own injury, and she saw him/her to view it, the case holding that the Defendant’s act constitutes emotional abuse detrimental to the mental health and development of the Plaintiff.

In a case where the Defendant, a child-care teacher, was prosecuted for committing emotional abuse under the Child Welfare Act by using a video without a cell phone to the son, who was at least 10 years old, and allowing the son, who was at least 3 years old, to feel extreme fears about the distance from the bridge, the case holding that the Defendant’s emotional abuse in the crime of child abuse under the Child Welfare Act, even though it is not necessary to do so even in an anti-human act that may cause harm to the life and body by leaving the child at least to the extent of abandonment, or by neglecting or neglecting a child under the protection and supervision, it is reasonable to interpret that it would cause harm to the child’s mental health and development, and it is reasonable to interpret that the Defendant’s emotional abuse and behavior, etc., at the time, appeared to have brought about harm to the child’s mental health and development, and that the Defendant’s emotional abuse and fear was easily justified even if she had expressed two or more images before being examined, and that the Defendant’s emotional abuse and fear could have been achieved by using his own mind and fear.

Article 17 subparagraph 5 of the Child Welfare Act and Article 71 (1) subparagraph 2 of the Child Welfare Act

Defendant

Mana and 1 other

Law Firm Jinjin, Attorneys Kim Jong-soo et al.

1. The guilty part

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

When the defendant fails to pay the above fine, the defendant shall be confined in the old house for the period calculated by converting 100,000 won into one day.

The provisional payment of the amount equivalent to the above fine shall be ordered.

2. The non-guilty part

Of the facts charged in the instant case, each of the violations of the Child Welfare Act against victimized children Nonindicted 1, Nonindicted 2, Nonindicted 3, and Nonindicted 4, and the violation of the Child Welfare Act by physical abuse against Nonindicted 5, shall be acquitted, respectively.

The summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly announced.

The Defendant is a person who served as a child care teacher at ○○ Child Care Center located in Chuncheon City ( Address omitted) from March 2013 to February 2015.

On February 16, 2015, at around 13:24, the Defendant: (a) laid down the Defendant’s mobile phone from Nonindicted 5 (the third-year old-old child), a child victim Nonindicted 5 (the △△△△△) who was suffering from a lower self-harm in the above child care center, and laid down the Defendant’s cell phone qualitatively and laid down the Defendant’s cell phone, and caused the victimized child who viewed it to feel extreme fear to the extent that the bridge is far away.

Accordingly, the defendant committed emotional abuse that harms the mental health and development of children.

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Partial statement of the witness Nonindicted 6’s witness

1. Legal statement of the witness Nonindicted 7

1. A copy of a certificate of authorization for nursery facilities and a license for establishment of social welfare corporations;

1. The results of the CD reproduction;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts;

Article 71(1)2 of the Child Welfare Act, Article 17 subparag. 5 of the Child Welfare Act, selection of fines

1. Detention in a workhouse;

Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. Summary of the assertion

The Defendant did not show the unfolded image to Nonindicted 5’s children; rather, Nonindicted 5’s children had the knowledge of getting out of their legs and arms on the paper sponsed, and the Defendant was aware of this, so he was able to cover it and let him sleep down immediately, and did not have any emotionally abused Nonindicted 5’s children.

2. First, we examine the meaning of “child abuse 1”) among child abuse under the Child Welfare Act.”

A. Provisions regarding the Child Welfare Act

Article 3 subparag. 7 of the Child Welfare Act provides that “The term “child abuse” means doing physical, mental, and sexual violence or cruel acts that may harm a child’s health or welfare or hinder normal development, and abandoning or neglecting a child’s protector.”

Article 71(1)2 of the Child Welfare Act provides that "any person who commits an act falling under any of subparagraphs 3 through 8 of Article 17 shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won." Article 17 Subparag. 3 of the Child Welfare Act provides that "any person who commits an act falling under any of subparagraphs 3 through 8 of Article 17 shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won." Article 17 Subparag. 5 of the same Act provides that any emotional abuse that causes harm to the mental health and development of a child, and subparagraph 6 of Article 71 of the same Act provides that any person who abandons a child under his/her protection and supervision, or neglects to protect, rear, treat, and educate him/her, or educate him/her, such a person,

B. Applicable legal principles

As to the relation between physical abuse and emotional abuse stipulated in subparagraph 3 of Article 17 of the Child Welfare Act and subparagraph 5 of the same Article, even if subparagraph 3 provides for "the act of emotional abuse causing damage to a child's body," in subparagraph 5, "the act of emotional abuse causing harm to the mental health and development of the child", among acts damaging a child's body, it is not possible to place an act that does not harm the mental health and development of the child, and the language and text of each of the above provisions, etc., it is interpreted that the act of subparagraph 5 refers to the act of emotional abuse or physical abuse without accompanying the exercise of tangible power, but it does not reach the physical damage (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do6015, Oct. 13, 201).

On the other hand, the crime of abuse under the Criminal Act is interpreted to be simply short of the reflective infringement on the other party's personality and at least to be applied to abandonment (see Supreme Court Decision 2000Do223, Apr. 25, 2000). Here, abandonment means an act that causes danger to the life and body by placing a person under legal or contractual obligation in a state where the person does not protect the person in need of assistance (see Article 271 of the Criminal Act). However, the crime of abuse under the Criminal Act is a crime of abuse under the Criminal Act where the person under protection and protection of the child's health and welfare is protected (Article 1 of the Child Welfare Act) and only a person under 18 years of age is protected (Article 3 subparagraph 1 of the same Act). The concept of child abuse under the Child Welfare Act is more than that of the adult, and thus, it is reasonable to interpret the concept of child abuse under the Criminal Act.

As seen above, when considering the purport of the provisions of the Child Welfare Act, the acts of physical abuse against a child, abandonment or neglect, etc., which are subject to the same punishment under the same provision, and the mutual relationship therewith, and the difference between the protected legal interest and the protected legal interest in the crime of child abuse under the Child Welfare Act and the crime of child abuse under the Criminal Act, in the crime of child abuse under the Child Welfare Act, it is reasonable to interpret that, even if it is not necessary even if there is no need to do so even an anti-human act that may cause danger to the life and body by leaving the child in a state where the child is not protected to the extent that it is equivalent to the abandonment, or by leaving the child under the protection and supervision of the child, or by committing emotional violence or cruel acts corresponding to the act of abandoning or neglecting the child under the protection and supervision of the child.

3. Detailed review;

According to each of the above evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the defendant was trying to show the video stored in the defendant's cell phone to Nonindicted 5 children during the so-called child care center so long as the defendant was working as infant care teacher (the birth in May 201), and Nonindicted 5 tried to show the video stored in the defendant's cell phone to Nonindicted 5 children, and showed his refusal response. Nevertheless, the defendant forced Nonindicted 5 children to view it out of the bridge before they see it, and the defendant forced Nonindicted 5 children to see it, as Non-Indicted 5's games, and the defendant's cell phone is installed with so-called shoulder with the arms and legs; Non-Indicted 5's cell phone does not listen to the mother's horse, or does not drink it, and Non-Indicted 5's cell phone can be acknowledged that he was tried to receive medical treatment by appealing the child's anxiety.

On the other hand, the defendant alleged that he did not show the videoless to the non-indicted 5's children, and the defendant did not prove what contents of the video or photograph shown to the non-indicted 5's children by evidence. However, when closely examining the response and behavior of the victim at the time, if the defendant shown the problem once to the victim, he did not show his refusal response before viewing the video. Thus, if the defendant shows the image or photograph of the victim at least once before viewing it, the defendant seems to have expressed the video that he had expressed the victim's two images, and it appears that he had the awareness that he had the victim's easy fear, but even if so, the defendant could not be justified by forcing him to view the video that caused such fear, and in light of the fact that the victim complained of fear and fear to his mother, the defendant's act of causing mental health and emotional abuse is sufficient to accept the above argument.

The above crime, which is recognized as emotional abuse, is also an abuse crime against a child who has not been physically, emotional, or personally mature, and the liability for such a crime cannot be deemed to be light. In light of the attitude of the defendant in the course of investigation and trial, it is inevitable for the defendant to severely punish the defendant.

On the other hand, if a fine becomes final and conclusive, a punishment shall be determined by taking into account favorable circumstances such as Article 20 subparag. 1 and Article 16 subparag. 8 of the Infant Care Act, Article 3 subparag. 7-2(a) of the Child Welfare Act, and Article 2 subparag. 4(l) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes, etc.]; Defendant is no longer working as child care teachers; Defendant is no longer working as child care teachers; and Defendant has no previous conviction.

1. Summary of this part of the facts charged

A. On February 3, 2015, at the above child care center around 12:28, the Defendant considered that Nonindicted Party 1 (3), who was the child of the △△△ Group, the Defendant, who was in charge of the Defendant, did not want to drink a breabbb, the Defendant left the appearance of the other children of about 10 minutes after immediately cutting the breab’s food board, and let approximately 20 minutes of the 20 minutes of the breab, and left the other children of the breab until the breab was completed and play, thereby leaving the bread.

Accordingly, the defendant committed emotional abuse that harms the mental health and development of children.

B. On February 3, 2015, around 12:48, the Defendant: (a) 12:48, at the Child Care Center in question; (b) 2:5, on the ground that Nonindicted 5 (year 3) the victimized child Nonindicted 5 (year 3), who is the △△ team, did not properly drink boomed, corrected his arms, corrected the boom, forced the son’s hand, which has a spores, and spores, left boomed.

As a result, the defendant committed physical abuse that harms the physical health and development of children.

C. On February 3, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 13:16, on the ground that the child victim Nonindicted 2 (year 3) who is the child of the △△△ Group (the child of Nonindicted 2 (year 3) sets up the toys with other children and the toy mouths; and (b) laid off the paper brick block that is being kept in the mouth of the bridge, and laid off it on the floor of a part of the gate, and caused the victimized child to be arranged for about 10 minutes.

Accordingly, the defendant committed emotional abuse that harms the mental health and development of children.

D. At around 12:25 on February 5, 2015, the Defendant observed the appearance of other children’s meals for six minutes on the grounds that the child victim Nonindicted 3 (the third-year old), Nonindicted 2 (the third-year old), and Nonindicted 4 (the third-year old-age), who was the child of the △△△△ at the point of the trial, do not normally listen to the horses at the point of the occupation of the Defendant, and had the victimized child Nonindicted 3 and Nonindicted 2 receive the pain and eventually cause the victimized child Nonindicted 4 to have the pain without gathering the pain.

Accordingly, the defendant committed emotional abuse that harms the mental health and development of children.

E. On February 5, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 12:31 on February 5, 2015, without any particular reason, brought the food board of Nonindicted 1 (three years of age, and inn) the child victim, who was the △△ Group, and left the 40 minutes of a congested meals until the other children end.

Accordingly, the defendant committed emotional abuse that harms the mental health and development of children.

바. 피고인은 2015. 2. 13. 13:13. 위 어린이집에서, △△△반 원아인 피해아동 공소외 2(3세)가 수업 시간에 장난을 친다는 이유로 피해아동을 불러내어 양팔을 신경질적으로 잡아당겨 바닥에 앉힌 뒤 혼자 내버려 두고, 피해아동이 베개로 장난을 친다는 이유로 양다리로 피해아동의 다리를 꼼짝 못하게 하고 양팔을 세게 움켜잡아 제압한 상태에서 약 5분간 야단을 치고 다른 아동들이 모두 낮잠을 자기 위해 자리를 잡은 후에도 한동안 그대로 방치하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant committed emotional abuse that harms the mental health and development of children.

2. Determination

A. The point of the emotional abuse of Nonindicted Party 1’s children on February 3, 2015

According to the records (including the CD reproduction result; hereinafter the same shall apply) and non-indicted 1 told the defendant that he will not drink boomed several times at the time when he begins. Accordingly, the defendant was unable to use his food, and Non-indicted 1's act of having the non-indicted 1 go out of the place of meal, and the defendant, who fear that the non-indicted 1's care of other children who used to play a toy with his food would come out of the place of meal, requested non-indicted 1 to sit up on the defendant's side, and he was seated on the defendant's side, and even if some children who finished a meal play a toy, it can be acknowledged that the non-indicted 1 was seated on the defendant's side for about 12:50 minutes from the same day to the defendant's side, and the non-indicted 1 was unable to take account of other children's emotional abuse and thus, it is difficult to see that the defendant's other children's act of taking it out of the meal of the defendant.

B. The point of Nonindicted 5’s physical abuse on February 3, 2015 against Nonindicted 5

Article 17 subparag. 3 of the Child Welfare Act provides that "the act of physical abuse that causes damage to a child's body or causes physical harm to a child's health and development" as one of the prohibited acts. It is reasonable to interpret that the act of physical abuse here refers to the act that causes damage to the child's body or is equivalent to such act. Meanwhile, in light of the legislative intent of the Child Welfare Act, the concept of damage should be deemed larger than the "injury", but it is reasonable to regard that it constitutes damage where the child's body is externally or functionally changed.

Based on such legal principles, even if the facts charged are recognized, it cannot be deemed as a physical abuse.

C. The point of emotional abuse against Nonindicted 2’s children on February 3, 2015

According to the records, on the ground that Nonindicted 2 gets a toy fluor and carried a fluor, which he was employed by another child, the defendant could be found to have found the fact that Nonindicted 2, on the ground that he was putting the toy fluor and putting the fluor, laid off the paper brick, which was arranged at the school floor, and let Nonindicted 2 organize more than 10 minutes. However, this is the Defendant’s implementation by the method of decoration as infant care teacher, and even if the method of decoration is somewhat unfair, it cannot be said that it is a emotional abuse degree.

D. The Defendant’s emotional abuse committed on February 5, 2015 against Nonindicted 3, Nonindicted 2, and Nonindicted 4

According to the records, even though the defendant completed the food distribution for other children at around 12:25 of the same day on the grounds that the defendant was not well aware of the horses at the time of the occupation of the child, the defendant had the above children provide meals without fooding for the above children, and had the above children provide meals for the above children at around 12:27 of the same day, starting with the food distribution for the above children and 12:31 of the same day, he provided the above children with food distribution, and the defendant started with the food distribution for the above children, and it can be recognized that the defendant started the food distribution with the above children. Thus, the food distribution method of the above defendant does not constitute emotional abuse against the above children.

E. The point of the emotional abuse of Nonindicted Party 1’s children on February 5, 2015

According to the records, the defendant did not bring the food board of the non-indicted 1 without any particular reason, but it appears that the non-indicted 1 would not bring the food board by having him not take a part in the Afaly meal, and it can be recognized that the non-indicted 1 made the other children sit ahead of the table for 40 minutes until the other children complete the meal. Thus, it cannot be said that it constitutes emotional abuse.

F. The point of the emotional abuse of Nonindicted 2’s children on February 13, 2015

According to the records, the defendant was able to find out the fact that the non-indicted 2 was able to take the scambling of the scam and scam the other children at the time of the class, and the non-indicted 2 was able to take the scambling of the scambling of the scam and to correct the attitude of the scambling of the scam at the level of 3 minutes after the scaming of the scam, the scambling of the scambling of the scambling of the scam, and the defendant was able to take the scambling of the scambling of the scambling of the scambling of the scambling of the scambling of the defendant, and that the scambling of the scambling of Non-indicted 2 was inappropriate.

3. Conclusion

Ultimately, the above act of the defendant appears to be an act based on the purpose of discipline as infant care teacher, and even though the method of the defendant's decoration is somewhat excessive or inappropriate, it does not reach the degree of violence or cruel act, if such act is deemed to be a child abuse, it may reduce the legitimate discipline of infant care teacher, and if it is deemed to be a child abuse, it is necessary to clarify the scope of criminal punishment for child abuse under the Child Welfare Act, and the concept of child abuse as seen earlier, it is insufficient to evaluate the evidence submitted by the prosecutor as a physical or emotional abuse, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

Thus, since the facts charged in this part of the facts charged constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, it is not guilty under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the summary of the judgment

Judges Park Jong-chul

Note 1) The prior meaning of “treatment” means very rough or harsh treatment of a person.