(영문) 부산고등법원 2018.06.14 2018노122 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산고등법원 2018.06.14 2018노122

아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(위계등간음)등

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine), the Defendant and the requester for an attachment order (hereinafter “Defendant”) recognized the victim’s intellectual disability at the time of the instant crime, clearly or dolusently, and by force, the fact of having sexual intercourse with the victim, who is a juvenile with a disability, is sufficiently recognized.

Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted all of the facts charged of this case, it erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination on the defendant's case

A. On November 19, 2015, the Defendant, at around 19:30 on November 19, 2015, had sexual intercourse with the victim, who is a juvenile with disabilities, by inserting the victim’s studio 34 in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, where the victim was 16 years of age, and was unable to take place on the floor, and was pushed off the victim’s chests, exceeded the victim’s breath, and by inserting his sexual organ, had sexual intercourse with the victim who is a juvenile with disabilities by force.

B. The lower court’s determination 1) as to whether the Defendant was aware that the victim was a disabled person at the time of the instant case, and considering the content of the text message sent by the Defendant to the victim’s male-child, etc. at the time of the instant case, the lower court suspected that the victim was not aware of the disabled person at the time of the Defendant’s sexual intercourse with the victim, but in light of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated, the lower court’s determination as to whether the victim was a mentally disabled person to the extent that the victim could not exercise his right to sexual self-determination, or that the Defendant was aware that the victim was a mentally disabled person at the time of the instant case.

It is difficult to see

In light of the facts charged in the instant case.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2018.11.01 2018고합69

-광주지방법원 해남지원 2018.04.18 2017고합48

-수원지방법원 평택지원 2016.02.17 2015고합144

-수원지방법원 성남지원 2016.04.14 2015고합295

-서울고등법원 2018.03.20 2017노3038