beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, the appeal by the person who requested the attachment order is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant’s act in the part of the Defendant’s case cannot be deemed as sexual intercourse by force in that it does not affect the victim’s exercise of power (the mistake and misapprehension of the legal principle), and the Defendant was in the state of mental disorder caused by mental disorder at the time of the instant case (mental disorder) and the Defendant’s punishment against the Defendant is too unreasonable.
(F) 2.2
The attachment order is unfair because the defendant's act does not constitute sexual intercourse by force, and the attachment period set by the court below is too unfair.
2. Determination:
A. The crime of violation of Article 7(5) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse is established when a child or juvenile sexual intercourse or commits an indecent act against a child or juvenile by deceptive scheme or force. In this case, the term “defensive force” means the ability sufficient to suppress the victim’s free will. Since it is not tangible, intangible or intangible, it is possible to not only assault and threat, but also use the social and political status or authority of the offender. Whether a child or an indecent act was sexual intercourse or indecent act by force or by force shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account all the circumstances, including the content and degree of the tangible power exercised, the type and degree of the offender’s status or authority, the age of the victim, the relationship between the offender and the victim, the circumstances leading to the act, the specific manner leading to the act, and the circumstances at the time of the crime.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Do13900, Feb. 11, 2010; Supreme Court Decision 2008Do4069, Jul. 24, 2008). The lower court: (a) the Defendant, as an adult aged 30 years old or older, created an atmosphere where the Defendant was able to fright the victim, who was 30 years old or older and did not have any other place outside the Defendant’s house and did not have any money; and (b) the Defendant returned home as he refused the request for a sexual relationship from the victim; and (c) the victim was able to have the victim returned home as he was able to