logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산고등법원 2014.07.09 2014노200
아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(위계등간음)
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. In full view of the statements of the victims of the grounds for appeal, the court below erred in the misapprehension of facts and the judgment of the court below which acquitted the victims of the primary facts charged and the conjunctive facts charged, even though the facts are acknowledged as having sexual intercourse with the victims by force, or the defendant had sexual intercourse with the victims in return for the provision of accommodation and the payment of rent.

2. Determination

A. On November 24, 2012, at around 03:00 on November 24, 2012, the Defendant: (a) talked with D (n, 13 years old) and smartphone-making punching punching to the Defendant’s house with the knowledge that D and the victim E (n, 13 years old) do not have any good place; and (b) allowed the victim E, who was on the Defendant’s house floor of the Defendant, to have the victim E, who was on the top of the Defendant’s house, did so and said that the victim would not get the victim while going together, and had the victim do so, and had the victim sexual intercourse once with the victim by taking part in the victim’s body.

Accordingly, the defendant had sexual intercourse with a juvenile by force.

B) The Defendant, at the same time and at the same place, committed sexual intercourse with the victim D, who was frightened from the victim’s body at the victim’s home room at the same time and at the same place, brought the victim into the victim’s body, she was frightened, who was frightened by the victim’s her chest and her son, and was forced to leave the victim’s her chest and her son with his her her her son and her her her son, who would not have been cut off by the victim’s her son and her son. Accordingly, the lower court held that the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the victim who is a juvenile by force. 2) The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal statements of the witness E, D, each legal statement of the police statement CD, each of the statements of E, D, E, and D recorded in the police statement video

arrow