(영문) 대구고등법원 2017.02.03 2016노386 | 리걸엔진

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) 대구고등법원 2017.02.03 2016노386

강간치상등

Text

1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years;

3. Sexual assault against the defendant for 80 hours.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (three years of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution) of the lower court is deemed to be too unfluent and unfair.

2. We examine ex officio the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor ex officio.

The lower court, on the part of the Defendant, committed a crime of rape or coercion by force against the victim after having the victim lose food by a stroke m, which is a local mental medicine, on 13 occasions, determined the victim as an ordinary concurrence of crimes of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc., and the injury or injury caused by rape or by force by force.

However, the act of using a stroke m, which is a local mental medicine, is not only a part of the crime of causing rape or causing bodily harm by force, but also a crime of violating the Narcotics Control Act (in the case of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc.), which aims to prevent harm to the health of the people and contribute to the improvement of public health by preventing the abuse of the right to sexual self-determination and the completeness of the body of an individual, and thus, there is a substantial difference between the crime of causing rape or causing bodily harm by force and the crime of causing bodily harm by force. Thus, the two crimes are not considered as one act,

I seem to appear.

Ultimately, the judgment of the court below shall be reversed in its entirety.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's improper argument of sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

【The judgment of the court below, which held that the Defendant was guilty of the crime, was in the relationship between the victim C (V, 40 years of age) from July 2006 and the relationship between the victim C (V, 40 years of age) and the victim on January 1, 2008, and continued to be in the relationship with his/her friendship. The Defendant, who was under a prescription and preparation for the treatment of stroke stroke stroke for the treatment of stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke stroke

참조조문

-마약류 관리에 관한 법률

유사 판례

-대구지방법원 서부지원 2016.06.23 2016고합60

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2016.09.13 2016고합19

-대구고등법원 2016.05.26 2016노74

-대구지방법원 2017.07.07 2016고합508

-청주지방법원 2018.01.05 2017고합46