logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2019.08.30 2018가단240843
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 50,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from December 27, 2017 to December 27, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. At around 23:00 on December 26, 2017, the Defendant had sexual intercourse with the Plaintiff, who was in the same state as the Plaintiff at the same place on the 27th day of the same month, under the influence of alcohol in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Maur D, and had sexual intercourse with the Plaintiff at around 04:00 of the same month.

B. On October 5, 2018, the Defendant was prosecuted for the above crimes by committing quasi-rape (Seoul Eastern District Court 2018Gohap210), and was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for three years by the court.

The Defendant appealed and appealed by Seoul High Court No. 2018No2887, but was rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on February 13, 2019, and the Supreme Court appealed by Supreme Court Decision 2019Do3112, but was rendered a judgment dismissing the appeal on April 8, 2019.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 12 through 19, 22, 23 and 24, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for emotional distress inflicted on the Plaintiff by the tort of quasi-rape on two occasions as above.

[Along with the fact-finding that a criminal judgment was not binding on the fact-finding in a criminal trial, the fact that the defendant was found guilty on the same fact-finding constitutes a flexible evidence, and thus, barring any special circumstance where it is deemed difficult to adopt a factual judgment in the criminal trial in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da69148, 69155, Feb. 14, 2008). As seen earlier, the defendant's conviction on the above quasi-rape-rape was affirmed, and there is no circumstance to find it difficult to adopt a factual judgment in the criminal trial in light of the evidence submitted by the defendant, and thus, the defendant's assertion that the facts recognized in the criminal judgment in question are inconsistent with the agreed fact-finding that is inconsistent with the above criminal judgment is rejected). further, compensation for damages.

arrow