logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2019.10.18 2019노1885
강요미수등
Text

The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the dismissed part, shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Reasons

1. The court below rendered a judgment dismissing a public prosecution on the detection of the content of electronic records, etc. among the facts charged against the defendant, and sentenced a conviction on the remaining facts charged.

Since only the Defendant appealed against the guilty portion of the judgment below, the dismissed part of the judgment below was separated and finalized, and was excluded from the scope of the judgment of this court.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. It is difficult to view that the Defendant threatened the victim with regard to attempted coercion 1). The Defendant’s act of demanding information does not go against the victim’s will. 2) There is no fact that the Defendant forced the victim to commit indecent act with regard to indecent act by compulsion.

3) The Defendant’s accusation of the Z as a crime of coercion against the Defendant in the absence of awareness of the falsity of the accusation is not recognized. However, the lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Determination

A. As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the lower court also asserted that the Defendant is the same as this part of the lower judgment.

The lower court’s determination on the assertion by the Defendant and defense counsel

1.(a)

B. (1) In (1) In early 2015, the Defendant became aware of the fact that the victim sent personal time while making a business trip with T and T and a business trip, which is male, and that this fact was “the misconduct that needs to be hidden as a woman, and the family is in danger of the fluoral,” and (2) the victim sent a letter to the Defendant on May 23, 2016, stating that “The Defendant sent a letter to the fluorous female,” and then asked the Defendant to check the facts of the above paragraph (1) at any other place, and the Defendant so requested.

arrow