beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal (in fact-finding) ① after the Defendant boarded the first-aid vehicle and attempted to repeatedly contact the victim’s body until the crime of the instant case is committed, ② the victim has consistently and specifically stated the facts of damage from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court; ③ the awareness of the Defendant appears not to reach the extent that he could not control his body at the time of the instant crime; ④ the Defendant’s spouse was not in a direct position to witness the instant crime within the first-aid vehicle; and ④ the Defendant’s spouse was not in a position to witness the instant crime, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant committed an indecent act with the intent of indecent act by force.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the defendant is erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. On April 23, 2019, around 00:28, the Defendant complained of the clothes from Cheongju-si in U.S. B and C, and the Defendant’s denying D filed a report 119, and the victim E (the family name, the female, and the age of 25), who is an emergency medical service worker, sent the Defendant to the said Defendant’s house at around 00:40 on the same day and moved the Defendant to F Hospital while on board the said house.
On April 23, 2019, at around 00:53, the Defendant, within the 1119 first-aid vehicle arriving in front of the emergency room of the F Hospital located in Cheongju-si, Cheongju-si, and the Defendant, in order for the victim to open the back of the first-aid vehicle, and the victim’s her ambbbbbbbb, etc., she used the victim’s her ambbbbbbb, etc. once in his/her hand, and rhhd the victim’
B. The judgment of the court below is affirmed by the court below as follows: the trial proceedings were conducted in the participatory trial, and the jury verdict (not guilty on seven unanimouss) was conducted; according to the evidence duly adopted by the court of the court below, the defendant was found to have only one time of her mbbbbbbbbs as stated in the facts charged in this case, and the victim was the victim at the time.