A. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (the age of 13 years)

(Indecent Act by Compulsion by Minors)

(b) Violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (Rape);

A person shall be appointed.

Defendant

Attorney Z (National Vessel)

U.S. Attorney

Daegu High Court Decision 2013Do674, 2013 Jeonno94 decided June 12, 2014 (Joint Judgment)

August 28, 2014

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

Criminal facts have to be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the preparation of evidence and the probative value of evidence conducted on the premise of fact-finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court (Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). The lower court, based on the reasons stated in its reasoning, determined that all facts of the Defendant committed the criminal facts in the judgment of the first instance court can be recognized, and rejected the allegation in the grounds of appeal for

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing the lower court’s fact-finding is merely an error of the lower court’s determination on the evidence selection and probative value, which belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. While examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal principles and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal principles regarding assault and intimidation in the crime of rape, the principle of trial on evidence and due process, the principle of due process, and the burden of proof, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation

In addition, under Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed, and thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the amount of punishment is unreasonable

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Young-chul

Justices Lee Sang-hoon

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Justices Kim Gin-young