Main Issues
The case affirming the judgment of the court below which held that it constitutes a escape under Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes that let the victim aged 11 return without any protective measure.
Summary of Judgment
The case affirming the judgment of the court below which held that it constitutes a escape under Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes that let the victim aged 11 return without any protective measure.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 5-3 (1) 2 of the Act on Aggravated Punishment, etc.
Reference Cases
[Plaintiff, Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)
Defendant
Defendant
Appellant
Defendant
Defense Counsel
Attorney Seo-gu
Judgment of the lower court
Daejeon District Court Decision 95No1904 delivered on May 22, 1996
Text
The appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
We examine the grounds of appeal.
According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, in this case where the defendant took advantage of the part of the victim's left part, etc. of the victim's 5th grade of national school in the south of 11 who is the right side of his driving, and went beyond the ground floor and took treatment for about one week, the court below held that the defendant's act of violation of Article 5 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes cannot be seen as the defendant's act of violation of Article 1 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Crimes, since the victim's body is not yet able to distinguish from the ground at all, but her own body's own body's own body's own body's degree and it goes beyond the ground's own body's own body's degree, the defendant without expertise in medical science should have another body's care of the victim's body and treatment, and the victim's opinion to see whether the victim can go back to the ground's body, and it cannot be seen as the ground for appeal.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Lee Don-hee (Presiding Justice)