2017Gohap169 Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection, etc. of Victims thereof

Ban (Minor Rape, etc. under thirteen years of age) and the wife of sexual crime

Violation of the Act on Punishment, Protection, etc. of Victims (relative Relations)

§ 404,000.00.00.00

Violation of the Protection, etc. of Victims Act (Non-age of 13);

Juvenile Indecent Act by Force)

2017. Beforemasta17 (Joint Attachment Orders)

Claimant

A

Yellow Britain, public trial for leather

Attorney B, C.

August 18, 2017

The defendant shall be innocent.

The request for the attachment order of this case is dismissed.

1. The facts charged and a summary of the grounds for requesting the attachment order;

[Facts of Prosecution]

The defendant and the person to whom the attachment order was requested (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") are the parts of the victim D (the 6 years of age at the time of the case).

1. Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof (Minor Rape, etc.)

가. 피고인은 2007. 12. 일자불상경 서울 구로구 E에 있는 피고인이 처 및 자녀, 막내 처제와 함께 살고 있던 주거지 내 위 막내 처제 방에서 외가 가족 모임차 방문한 피해자(여, 6세)가 위 방에 들어오자 나이가 어려 정신적 미성숙으로 제대로 저항하지 못하는 피해자에게 "빨리 침대 이불로 들어와라"고 한 다음 피해자가 이불 속으로 들어오자 손으로 피해자의 오른쪽 옆구리와 가슴, 배 부위를 만지고 이에 피해자가 밖으로 나가려고 하자 피해자의 몸을 잡아당겨 나가지 못하게 하고 피해자를 다시 침대 위에 눕힌 뒤 "아무에게도 말하지 말아라"고 하면서 손을 피해자의 팬티 속에 넣어 음부를 만지다가 피해자의 팬티를 벗기고 혀로 피해자의 음부를 핥은 후 피해자가 계속 하지 말라고 하면서 거부하는데도 피고인의 성기를 피해자의 음부에 비비며 피해자를 간음하려다가 피해자가 화장실에 가고 싶다고 하면서 나가는 바람에 그 뜻을 이루지 못하였다.

나. 피고인은 2008. 1. 일자불상경 제가항 기재 피고인의 주거지에서 외가 가족 모임차 방문한 피해자(여, 6세)가 위 피고인의 막내 처제 방 침대에서 피해자의 사촌 동생들과 놀고 있는 것을 보고 방으로 들어가 피해자의 사촌 동생들을 밖으로 내보낸 뒤 피해자가 피고인을 피해 밖으로 나가려고 하자 피해자의 팔을 잡고 피해자를 침대로 끌고 가 눕힌 다음 "아무에게도 말하지 말아라"고 하면서 손으로 피해자의 가슴과 배부위를 만지고 손을 피해자의 팬티 속에 넣어 음부를 만지고 피해자의 팬티를 벗겨 혀로 음부를 핥은 뒤 피해자가 계속 하지 말라고 하면서 거부하는데도 피고인의 성기를 피해자의 음부에 비비며 피해자를 간음하려다가 피해자가 화장실에 가고 싶다고 하면서 나가는 바람에 그 뜻을 이루지 못하였다.

다. 피고인은 2008. 1. 일자불상경 제가항 기재 피고인의 주거지에서 외가 가족 모임차 방문한 피해자(여, 6세)가 위 피고인의 막내 처제 방 침대에서 혼자 텔레비전을 보다가 잠이 든 것을 보고 피해자의 옆으로 다가가 손으로 피해자의 가슴과 음부를 만지던 중 피해자가 잠에서 깨자 "아무에게도 말하지 말아라"고 하면서 피해자의 팬티를 벗기고 음부를 핥은 뒤 피해자가 계속 하지 말라고 하면서 거부하는데도 피고인의 성기를 피해자의 음부에 비비며 피해자를 간음하려다가 피해자가 화장실에 가고 싶다고 하면서 나가는 바람에 그 뜻을 이루지 못하였다.

Accordingly, the defendant tried to have sexual intercourse with the victim under 13 years of age by force over three times.

2. Violation of the Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes and Protection of Victims thereof (a minor under the age of 13);

On 208, the Defendant stopped the passenger car driven by the Defendant at the right spande of spring 2008, and the Defendant was able to see the victim (six years of age) who was seated on the right pande of the damage of the Defendant at the top of the spande that the Defendant’s wife was set off from the spande of the car at the spande of spring 2008, by putting the Defendant’s hand into the victim’s pande, and her part was her hand.

Accordingly, the defendant committed indecent acts by compulsion against the victim under 13 years of age.

[Fact of Grounds for Filing Requests for Attachment Orders]

As indicated in the instant facts charged, the Defendant committed a sexual crime against a minor under the age of 19 on at least two occasions. Nevertheless, there is no awareness or doubt as to the sexual crime, such as denying all the crimes and refusing to conduct an investigation prior to the request for an attachment order. In light of this, the Defendant is deemed to have committed a sexual crime, and thus, is likely to recommit the sexual crime.

2. Summary of the defendant and his defense counsel

A. Paragraph 1 of the facts charged

1) The victim made a statement from December 2007 to January 2008 that he had committed each crime listed in paragraph (1) of the facts charged in the Defendant’s residence room (hereinafter referred to as “livering room”) where F (the Defendant’s wife and the victim’s leader were living together) and viewed television. However, before the time of the crime, F had all households, such as bed and television, and she was living in other places by her directors, and she used only she was she was she was she and she was she used to wear a mixed door room, and this degree of credibility was extremely low since the victim’s statement was inconsistent with the situation at the time of the crime.

2) In addition to the above circumstances, the time when the victim first informed the victim of the sexual crime and the time when the victim made the victim's statement was at intervals of not less than eight years and did not mention the fact of damage at all during that period, despite a long period of time, the victim's statement is very specific and detailed, the victim's statement is close to the principal debt and the victim's attempt to engage in sexual intercourse in the face of the door is difficult to understand that the victim attempted to engage in sexual intercourse even though anyone could have access easily, and other objective circumstances and the victim's statement are not consistent with the victim's statement. In light of other objective circumstances and the fact that the victim's memory is considerably distorted or made by itself, there is a high possibility that the victim made a statement with the victim's belief and awareness of the fact of damage due to 'proking', stress caused by school violence, school mal adaptation, etc., and the victim made a false statement by referring to the fact of damage to the surrounding person, thereby inducing the victim's interest and interest to the victim's sexual crime.

B. Regarding the facts charged No. 2

1) The 'Damas' car owned by the Defendant is merely 1.4m the body width of the vehicle so that two adults can sit up. The victim's statement that H (the Defendant's wife and the victim's large mother) took place for a considerable period of time in the state where he became aware of the victim is insufficient.

2) According to the victim, the crime described in paragraph (2) of the facts charged was around spring of 2008. Since each crime listed in paragraph (1) of the facts charged, the victim’s statement that the victim was seated immediately next to the defendant even though the victim was previously abused three times or more from the defendant, is difficult to believe in itself.

C. In all the facts charged Nos. 1 and 2

Even after each of the crimes described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of the facts charged, the victim was interchangeed with the defendant's side and visited the house of the defendant's husband and wife, which is not completely consistent with the allegations by the victim that sexual assault was committed by the defendant.

3. Determination of facts charged

A. Relevant legal principles

1) Criminal facts in a criminal trial ought to be established based on strict evidence with probative value, which leads a judge to have a reasonable doubt. Thus, in a case where the prosecutor’s proof fails to sufficiently reach the extent that the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable, even if there is a doubt of guilt, such as where the defendant’s assertion or defense is inconsistent or unreasonable, it should be determined in the interests of the defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2012Do3722, Sept. 26, 2013; 2010Do1487, Apr. 28, 2011).

2) In particular, solely based on the victim’s statement, in order to determine the guilty guilty of the facts charged, there must be little probative value to the extent that there is little doubt about the authenticity and accuracy of the statement. Determination of whether such probative value exists should take into account not only the reasonableness, consistency, objective reasonableness of the victim’s statement itself, but also personal factors, such as the victim’s intellectual ability and character. Therefore, if the victim’s statement does not have any such probative value and cannot be ruled out any possibility of falsity, the remaining statement on the harm should not be readily concluded as true, and should be carefully determined whether the statement satisfies the probative value required in the criminal trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2015Do17518, 2015Do263, May 27, 2016; 2011Do1613, May 10, 2012).

B. Determination on the credibility, etc. of the victim's statement

The defendant denies the crime from the investigative agency to the court by asserting that the victim did not have sexual intercourse on three occasions or that there was no indecent act on the part of the defendant.

Of the evidence consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, the remaining evidence, excluding the victim’s statement, is based on the victim’s statement, or by itself, it is insufficient to view the victim’s statement as evidence with independent probative value that can be found guilty of the facts charged. Therefore, in order to find the Defendant guilty on the basis of the victim’s statement corresponding to the direct evidence that constitutes the only direct evidence to acknowledge the facts charged in the instant case, the victim’s statement should be reliable in light of

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, there are the following circumstances where it is difficult to recognize the credibility of the victim's statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case.

1) The reasonableness of the victim’s statement itself

The victim made a statement in the police about each of the crimes of this case (the three-time sexual assault at the boundary of paragraph (1) of the facts charged, the sexual assault at the end of paragraph (2) of the facts charged). The victim's statement is in itself a combination of the following statements about unreasonable facts, statements about the facts that the victim inferred and inferred, statements about the fact that the victim did not memory at the time of the crime, not his experience, and statements about the fact that the investigator made by the investigator's patition or doubt, resolution of the investigator's patition or doubt, and statements made by ethical and apparent changes, regardless of the lack of memory and absence of memory, in order to justify his own position and recognize its authenticity. In light of the empirical rule, it is doubtful that the statement is reasonable

A) From December 207 to January 2008, the victim stated that each of the crimes listed in paragraph (1) of the facts charged was committed in the door room (F) at the time when the family conference was at the Defendant’s residence. Around that time, the victim’s family gathering, including the victim’s family, had been at the Defendant’s residence, and F, had resided in the door room. However, the above number of family gatherings was 5 members of the Defendant’s family (the Defendant, large number of H, Hanam G, 1, 3 South Korea J), four family members of the other third village (0, Pma, Ma Q), four family members of the victim’s family (the mother K, Ro-k, Ro-ho, Ro-ho, and 13 members of the victim’s family (the victim’s family registry No. 40, 60, 276, 196, 400, 196, 405, 196, etc. of the victim’s family register).

In light of the above circumstances, the victim's statement (Evidence No. 36,37,69 pages, especially the third third sexual assault, the victim stated to the effect that the victim was at the lower will of the victim and was placed on the floor of the victim's panty and the victim's panty and the victim's panty and the victim's panty and the victim's panty and panty and she tried to engage in sexual intercourse (Evidence No. 36,37,69 pages, and the third third sexual assault), with the victim's statement to the effect that the victim was at the bottom of the victim's panty and spanty of the victim's panty at the time that it cannot be easily understood. Furthermore, since the victim's panty and spanty of the victim's panty were 65 pages at the time of the crime, the victim's statement to the defendant's nature at the time of the crime cannot be easily understood.

나) 또한, 수사관이 가족 등이 문간방으로 들어올 수 있지 않느냐는 질문을 제기하자 피해자는 사촌동생(P 또는 Q)이 문간방으로 들어와 세 번째 성폭행을 목격했다고 하면서 피고인이 사촌동생에게 나가라고 하였다고 진술하였다(증거기록 63쪽). 피해자는 사촌동생이 피해자가 성폭행당하는 걸 봤느냐는 물음에 '봤을 수도 있을 거라 생각 해요, 목격했을 거라 생각해요, 침대 위로 올라왔어요, 사촌동생이 이렇게 보고 있었어 요'(증기기록 66쪽)라고 진술하였는데, 사촌동생이 문간방에 들어와 목격할 때까지도 피고인의 성폭행이 지속되었다는 것은 비합리적이고, 피해자보다 어린 사촌동생이 쉽게 출입하여 목격할 수 있는 상황 아래에서 피고인이 간음을 시도했다는 점도 이해하기 어렵다. 피해자는 사촌동생이 본채에서 문간방으로 건너와 목격하였다는 전제 하에 본채에서 나오는 문과 문간방의 문을 열 때 각각 나는 소리가 '엄청 크게 들리는 소리' 및 '그냥 슥하는 소리'라고 진술하였는데(증거기록 63쪽), 피고인이 본채의 문에서 '엄청 크게 들리는 소리'가 났음에도 성폭행을 지속하였다는 점은 더욱 믿기 어렵다.

C) The victim stated to the effect that "the defendant continued sexual assault upon the victim's request, she would have her head, and that she would not have her head, and that she would have her head, and that she would like to do so." The victim stated to the effect that she would have her head, she would not want to do so, and that she would have a toilet, she would have her head, she would have her head, and that she would have her headed, she would have her headed, and that she would have her headed with her head, her headed with her head, she could not have her headed with her head, and that she would have her headed with her toilet with her clothes, and that she could not have been aware of the fact that she could have her headed with her head from 207 to 208, and that she could have been aware of the fact that she could have her sexual intercourse with her head.

D) Furthermore, when the victim made a statement about sexual assault on the son's son, the victim stated that the son(H) was imprising the son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son.

2) consistent statements by victims

In the process of statements made by the police, the victim stated or changed the contents of the statements, which are contradictory to each other, as follows, with respect to the circumstances before and after the statements.

A) The victim made several statements to the effect that he/she was aware that he/she had sexual assault at the door room, and he/she was in a place near the door, that he/she would not have been in a room, and that he/she would have been in the front place that he/she would have she would have been in the front place that he/she would be on board a canter (29 pages of evidence), and that he/she would have been likely to be in a re-sexual assault from the defendant. This is inconsistent with the victim's statement (5 pages of evidence record) that he/she was unaware of the meaning of sexual assault at the time of the victim's statement (5 pages of evidence record), and that the victim voluntarily found the defendant's house, and met the defendant's house (53,54 pages of evidence record). Furthermore, in relation to the background of his/her being on board, when the victim did not want to have his/her residence, he/she did not want to have his/her her own it on the part of the defendant's house (5).

B) In addition, the victim made a statement that he had almost little number of family meetings after the Defendant’s sexual assault (Evidence Nos. 29, 51, 52) but this was reversed immediately (Evidence Nos. 29, 51, 52). The victim stated that he had a family meeting at the Defendant’s place of residence that the victim continued to reside in the Defendant’s place of residence even after the sexual assault, and stated that he was only in the Defendant’s place of residence, and that he was only in the Defendant’s place of residence, and that he was only in the Defendant’s place of residence, as well as that he stated that he was “the Defendant’s mother was avoided” (Evidence No. 73 pages of the evidence record). This is inconsistent with the Defendant’s house entrance and exit after the victim’s sexual assault. The victim appears to have been aware of the fact by himself.

Furthermore, although the victim was unaware of the fact that he was sexual assault first, he was aware that he was sexual assault at elementary school 5 and 6's health hours (Evidence records 55 pages). However, the victim had the defendant at a family conference around the 6th day of elementary school (Evidence records 53 pages), and she had been living in the house of the defendant, i.e., the defendant and the H father after he was aware of the meaning of sexual assault accurately (Evidence records 103 pages). The victim's statement and "the defendant had been living in the house of the defendant's own after being aware of the meaning of sexual assault."

C) The victim stated in the first half of the statement that sexual assault was committed on two occasions in the door room, two times in the tea, and one time in the tea (Evidence Records 28,29 pages), and that there were two or three times in the door room, one time in the tea, and four times in the tea (Evidence Records 30 pages). The victim stated that there was no investigator’s sexual assault in the door room (Evidence Records 30 pages) and that there was no investigator’s sexual assault in the door room.

(증거기록 31쪽). 그런데 피해자는 진술 중반에 수사관이 구체화되지 못한 위 성폭행어 관하여 다시 묻자 '네 번째 성폭행'이라고 표현하면서 '자고 있을 때 피고인이 들어왔다. 처음이랑 두 번째랑 똑같이 행위를 하고'라는 진술을 한 다음 기억이 잘 나지 않는다고 하였고(증거기록 43, 44쪽), 다시 '세 번째 성폭행'이라고 표현하면서 '기억이 안 나요'라고 한 다음 '스폰지밥'이라는 프로그램을 특정하여 '텔레비전을 시청하다가 깜박졸았다'는 진술을 추가하였으며(증거기록 62쪽), 여기에 앞서 보듯 사촌동생이 들어왔는데 성폭행 장면을 봤을 것이라는 취지의 진술과 함께 당시 목격 장면을 종이에 표시하였다증거기록 63쪽). 한편 수사관이 피해자의 진술이 '막연'하다고 하자 피해자는 당시 체위, 탈의 상태, 피고인의 머리 위치 등을 비롯하여 공소사실 제1, 2항 기재 각 범행 중 가장 상세하게 그림과 함께 성폭행의 모습을 설명하였다(증거기록 64쪽 이하).

As above, not only clearly explained the victim's experience of sexual assault that the victim is not capable of memory much more specifically than the experience of other sexual assault, but also stated that the victim stated that the head of the defendant was tried to be inserted in this state at the time when the victim's head was between the victim's bridge, and that the investigator raised a question about this, the victim stated that the victim was able to see the head at the time (P) (Evidence Record 67 pages).

D) Although the victim made a clear statement that there was "the victim's inserting attempt", the victim's sexual assault was shotly 37 pages (37 pages of the evidence). It is somewhat far away from the attempt to inserting the statement. The victim's statement was shotly expressed as "the victim's 7th page" (the 75th page of the evidence record) and "the victim's statement was not shotly shotly shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot shot s, and the victim's statement.

E) In addition, the victim made a statement that he was able to see that he was able to see the victim's first sexual assault as soon as possible due to 'the victim' (28 pages of the evidence record), and that he was able to see TV as 'the victim was able to see the victim' (40 pages of the evidence record), and that the defendant was able to see 'the TV' (40 pages of the evidence record). The first first was 'the victim was able to see her TV' and the second was her to her to her to her, and the third was her memory, and the third was her memory (61,62 pages of the evidence record) and there is also a lack of consistency in the contents of the background information.

Second, there is no content that sexual assault was led by the defendant at the beginning of the statement (Evidence No. 29 pages). A statement was made to the effect that the defendant led the defendant (Evidence No. 42 pages), and that the defendant was "honna to show a deadly dynamic (Evidence No. 29 pages)" but the defendant was "honna to show a deadly dynamic (Evidence No. 40, No. 41 pages).

In addition, when the victim explains another person's location at the time of sexual assault in the door room, the victim made a statement to the effect that the mother (F) was together with the haga (K and H) in the defendant's residence, and that when the defendant explains why it was distorted in the door room, the victim made a statement to the effect that F was much at the time when the defendant makes a job (76 pages of the evidence record) (76 pages of the evidence record), and eventually, the victim made a statement to the effect that "(76,77 pages of the evidence record) is not consistent with each other," such as "(76, 77 pages of the evidence record) memory was inside the house."

3) In the course of making a statement by the police, the victim’s excessive statements made an excessive concrete and conclusive statement that is deemed to have been experienced at the age of six as follows. In light of the empirical rule, there are doubtful doubts about the credibility of the statement.

A) At the time of the first sexual assault in the door room, the victim made a statement that he suffered a tension, blue tension, and the defendant made a statement that he had suffered a tension, tension (33 pages of evidence). At the time of the indecent act in the line on board, he made a statement that he had been in 's name', a small number of clothes, and a short 's clothes' (46 pages of evidence record). (46 pages) Even though 6 children experienced a shock situation and were relatively easy to call memory, it seems that the victim's statement at the time of the passage of eight years or more seems to be more specific and more. In addition, the victim's statement at the time of the passage of eight years or more, such as the body body of the defendant and the victim, the Defendant's hand and the Defendant's sexual intercourse with the part on his own, the Defendant's ability to memory the part on his own, the Defendant's sexual intercourse with the part on his own, and his family and supporting evidence, the location of 70 days or more.

B) As seen earlier, the victim made a statement that the victim exceeded the Defendant, or the Defendant was sent to the Defendant at the time of committing a crime at the time of the police statement that displayed the base. As can be seen in the statement such as ‘(42 pages of the evidence record),’ ‘(42 pages of the evidence record)’ and ‘(44 pages of the record of the evidence record)’ and the statement (70 pages of the record of the record) that ‘at the end of the 44 pages’ and ‘at the end of the 5th and the 6th grade of the elementary school,’ the victim made a statement that she had become aware of the meaning of sexual assault at the time of the crime, not at the time of the time, but at the time of the police statement that he had come to know more knowledge and information. Some of these statements are inconsistent with the statement that she became aware of only the 5th and the 6th grade of the 5th grade of the elementary school. It is doubtful whether the victim’s statement was based on the experience at the time.

C) The victim made a statement on the premise that "the defendant tried to put his/her finger into a negative part" in relation to sexual assault on the son's side. However, when the victim's sexual assault appearance, it is necessary to put the victim's sexual intercourse into the negative part (Evidence No. 29, 47 of the evidence record) and to put him/her into the negative part (Evidence No. 29, 47 of the record). The above statement is likely to be a conjection of the victim's sexual assault. And there is no particular mentioning from the initial part of the statement about the circumstance that the defendant stopped his/her sexual assault.

Ga (Evidence No. 29 pages), Ga (Evidence No. 29 pages), Ga (Evidence No. 29), and Ha (H), considering the fact that the Defendant sn't dn't have been dn't dn't, the Defendant described the situation at the specific time, i.e., the Defendant's hand as soon as possible (Evidence No. 47 pages). It is too concrete that the appearance of sexual assault as stated by the victim and the situation at the time are about the past experienced at the age of 6 (Evidence No. 46 pages of Evidence No. 46).

D) In addition, the statement of "(No. 45 pages of the evidence record)," "I am fly fly," and "I am am son (No. 46 pages of the evidence record)," and "I am am am am ambly, I would like to do so (No. 47 pages of the evidence record)," and "I am am am ambly, I would like to know that I would soon am," (No. 47 pages of the evidence record)," and "I am ambly, I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would not in the past but in the past, it was about the idea at the time of the statement of the police, and it is inconsistent with the statement that I came to know that I would come to know that I would come to the 5th and 6th grade of the elementary school.

4) Difference between the details of the statement and the police statement.

The victim stated to her mother (K) and to the W Middle School Specialized Counselors (X), somewhat abstractly abstractly about sexual assault in the door room, and appears not to speak sexual assault in the line or at least abstractly. On the other hand, the police statements suggested specific facts and detailed information to the extent that they will be excessive.

A) Each of the crimes described in paragraph (1) of the facts charged was around December 2007 and around January 2008. As seen earlier, the victim knew that the Defendant’s act constituted a sexual assault and was aware of the fact that the Defendant’s act constituted a crime as a sexual assault (2012 through 2013) at the fifth or sixth grade of the elementary school (2012 through 2013), and the victim stated that the Defendant’s act was constantly memoryed, and that “the Defendant was memoryd every time he was born at her mother’s delivery (the Defendant) and at her mother’s home.”

(55 pages) On the other hand, the victim told K for the first time on February 2016 or around March 3, 2016 (Evidence Records 188, K Recording No. 1, 9). The victim mentioned 'sexual assault' to his mother after about 3 and 4 years, even at the time of the crime, even if she became aware of about 18 years from the time of the crime, and 3 and 4 years since her very detailed maintenance, even though she continued to memory as to the fact of damage, and even she did so, she stated us that she was unable to answer her sexual assault only if she was sexually sexually ill, she stated that she was sexual assault by she was 6 years from the first grade of elementary school. (Evidence Records 188 pages). The victim stated that she did not have detailed and detailed explanation as to her mother's statement to the same extent as her police statement, and that she inserted it into her first statement on the premise that she was unable to inserting evidence.

B) On June 30, 2016, the victim, who fell under the category 7 of interest as a result of the students’ emotional behavioral characteristics test, stated the fact of injury again in the course of counseling with X. From June 16, 2014 to June 30, 2016, when he/she became aware of the meaning of sexual assault (from June 16, 2014 to June 30, 2016, he/she consulted with X during the 11-time period from the point when he/she became aware of the meaning of sexual assault, but the content of the counseling was 12 copies of the Defendant or sexual assault.

According to the records of the Defendant’s Personal Counseling Book (12, 14th of the evidence No. 12) and X’s legal statement (X No. 3 pages) dated June 30, 2016 and July 1, 2016, the victim mentioned that the victim’s sexual assault could not speak to X before that date, and that X’s sexual assault was first sexually related, and that the victim became aware of sexual assault by the Defendant, and that there was no sexual assault by the Defendant at the time of 808 (2008), the Defendant’s sexual fingerprint was 2-3 times and 9 years (209), and that the sexual assault was suspended due to directors at the time of 9 (209). The victim appears to have stated that there was no previous police’s initial statement as to K’s first statement and that there was no sexual assault.

On the other hand, the victim made a statement to the effect that X did not inform K of sexual assault (Evidence No. 58,76 pages). The above statement is inconsistent with the statement that "I wish to know about the fact of his/her damage (Evidence No. 38,54 pages)" is contradictory to the statement (Evidence No. 38,54 pages) that it was difficult to obtain, and that I want to know about the fact of his/her damage, or that I did not know about the fact of his/her damage (Evidence No. 69 pages).

C) In addition, the victim received a mental treatment from around June 23, 2014, the victim stated that he/she did not mention the defendant or sexual assault doctor before July 13, 2016 (the evidence record 87 pages), and that he/she had a perception that he/she would have sexual assault and control when he/she lives in the medical record records of July 13, 2016 (the evidence record 103 pages).

라) 피해자는 '(범행 당시) 오줌을 쌌으면 누가 알아주지 않았을까'(증거기록 38쪽), '나는 이렇게 힘든데 왜 알아주는 사람 없는지, 내가 힘들었다는 걸 알기는 할까(증거기록 54쪽), '선생님(X)이 먼저 성폭행과 관련된 이야기냐고 물어봐 주셔서 편하게 말할 수 있었다. 선생님이 날 알아주시는구나'라고 진술하는 등(증거기록 55쪽) 피해자 진술의 전반을 보더라도 자신에 대한 관심과 연민을 상당히 갈망하였던 것으로 보임에도 불구하고, 따돌림이나 콤플렉스 등에 관하여는 제3자에게 곧잘 언급하였던 것과는 달리, 성폭행 관련 피해사실을 오랜 기간 어머니, 상담교사, 정신과 의사를 비롯하여 아무에게도 전혀 보고하지 않은 사정은 석연치가 않다.

C. Sub-decision

Examining the above circumstances in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the victim’s statement to the effect that the Defendant intended to have sexual intercourse or committed indecent act by force on three occasions, as stated in the facts charged in the instant case, is highly doubtful. Therefore, on the premise that the credibility of the victim’s statement is acknowledged, it is difficult to view that the entire facts charged in the instant case was proven without reasonable doubt, and the remaining evidence submitted by the prosecutor, excluding the victim’s statement, is insufficient to recognize the facts charged in the instant case, and there is no other

Thus, the facts charged against the defendant constitute a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act

4. Determination as to the request for attachment order

As long as the defendant is acquitted, the request for the attachment order of this case is dismissed in accordance with Article 9 (4) 2 of the Act on the Probation and Electronic Monitoring, etc. of Specific Criminal Offenders.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

The presiding judge shall be changed.

Judges Tae-young

Judicial Chief Judge;

1) K makes a statement to the effect that “K operated a L restaurant from November 2007 to February 2008, 2008,” and from the time of operation of the above restaurant, H’s house (the Defendant’s residence as stated in paragraph (1) of the prosecution) to the effect that there was a family gathering in addition to the above restaurant (K recording 6, 9 pages), F made a statement to the effect that “the family gathering had existed at the Defendant’s house from around B, 2007 to around March 2008 (F record 10 pages),” the Defendant also made a statement to the effect that there was a family gathering at the Defendant’s home from around B, 2007 to around D, 208, there was no family gathering at all after the above restaurant’s residence (Evidence record 276 pages). In light of the fact that there was no evidence submission statement to the effect that there was no family meeting at all after the above restaurant opening.

2) According to F'H's statement to the effect that "H was a director of the apartment at the defendant's residence as stated in paragraph (1) of the facts of prosecution (the third side of the F-record), the defendant and H's each resident registration record number of 117 pages of evidence and the reference materials (Evidence No. 10 marks) dated 8, 2017, which were submitted to the prosecutor, the defendant and H were transferred to the defendant's residence (Seoul M) on August 19, 2002, and the H transferred to the defendant's residence (Seoul M) on May 19, 2008, "F was moved to the N apartment in Guro-gu Seoul, Seoul on May 19, 2008; the first day of May 11, 2008; the second day of May 2008, if the F is a director's expense, it is recognized that the statement of 10 to 200 years from the 20th day of entry into the statement "F.16 days of residence".

3) According to the victim, the door room is allowed to enter the door (Evidence No. 33, 61, 78 pages) adjacent to the victim, and the defendant also stated that there is a 's closed door' (Evidence No. 275 pages).

4) When the victim specifically presents '20 minutes of sexual assault', '10 minutes are too short and 30 minutes are too short,' the victim also presented the grounds that '10 minutes are too short and 30 minutes too long,' but seems to be stated on the basis of 'the direction' rather than accurately memory the situation at the time. (No evidence record 70 pages)

5) There are “T (T), U (Nam), and V (Nam)” for H,O, K, and F as so-called “other brothers and sisters” (Evidence No. 254 pages), and it appears that “n” is called “T on the part of the victim’s token.”

6) As seen earlier, from December 2007 to January 2008, the victim is prior to entering an elementary school.

7) The victim stated in a relatively detailed statement that he was suffering from considerable mental pain due to school adaptation (Evidence Records 25 to 27 pages) in the first half of the statement by the investigator (Evidence Records 25 to 27).

8) The victim stated that X did not speak or did not speak in detail about sexual assault on board the train, and that the victim also knew of “specificly” (Evidence No. 76 pages).