(영문) 대법원 2021.4.8. 선고 2021도1083 판결

Article 2 (1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, which was amended by Act No. 5931 of Feb. 8, 1999, defines disabled persons as "persons who are under considerable restrictions in their daily lives or social lives for a long time due to physical or mental disability." Article 2 (1) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities, which was wholly amended by Act No. 8367 of Apr. 11, 2007, defines disabled persons as "persons under considerable restrictions in their daily lives or social lives for a long time due to physical or mental disability."

Article 2(3) of the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Act No. 11521, Oct. 22, 2012; Act No. 11521; hereinafter “Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities”) newly established a definition of abuse of persons with disabilities as “the physical, mental, emotional, emotional, or verbal violence, or cruel act, economic exploitation, abandonment, or neglect against a person with disabilities.” This is to promote the efficiency of remedy for persons with disabilities and the protection of persons with abuse. However, there was no separate provision for abuse of persons with disabilities at the time. Since then, Article 2(3) of the Act amended by Act No. 13366, Jun. 22, 2015; (b) on the grounds that “the act of abuse of persons with disabilities is included in the abuse of persons with disabilities; (c) the act of abuse of persons with disabilities, economic exploitation, abandonment, or neglect; (d) the act of abuse of persons with disabilities, which further violates Article 59-7 subparag. 6 and 36 of the Act.

Article 86(3)2 of the former Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities (amended by Act No. 15270, Dec. 19, 2017) (amended by Act No. 14562, Feb. 8, 2017) which was amended by Act No. 14562, which was applied in the instant case, increased statutory penalty by imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding 50,00 won (the Act on Welfare, amended by Act No. 17791, Dec. 29, 2020 following the instant case, newly establishes the definition of crimes related to abuse of persons with disabilities (Article 2(4)), expands persons subject to employment restriction orders and applicable institutions (Article 59-3); habitually, a person obligated to report or a person obligated to report commits a crime related to abuse of persons with disabilities who are subject to his/her protection, supervision or treatment (Article 88-2).

2. Judgment of this case

가. 이 사건 공소사실은, 사회복지사로 근무하는 피고인이 장애인보호작업장에서 지적장애 3급인 피해자의 머리에 쇼핑백 끈 다발을 올려놓고 다른 장애인 근로자들이 피해자를 보고 웃게 하고 피해자의 사진을 찍고, 피해자에게 눈을 찌르고 우는 시늉을 하도록 지시하여 피해자가 어쩔 수 없이 이를 따르도록 하여 피해자로 하여금 수치심을 느끼게 하여 정서적 학대행위를 하였다는 내용이다.

나. 원심은, ① 피고인이 피해자의 머리 위에 끈 다발을 올리고 사진을 찍으면서 웃었고, 다른 근로 장애인들이 있는 방향으로 피해자의 몸을 돌렸으며 다른 근로 장애인들도 피해자를 보고 웃은 점, ② 피고인이 피해자에게 스스로 눈을 찌르고 우는 시늉을 하라고 지시한 점, ③ 피해자는 평소 자신의 말을 듣지 않으면 퇴근을 못하게 하고 혼을 내는 피고인을 무서워하고 마주치는 것도 꺼렸는바, 피해자는 어쩔 수 없이 피고인의 위 지시를 따른 점, 4 이 사건 당시 피해자는 창피함을 느끼고 화장실에 가서 울기까지 하였으며 사회복무요원들에게 자신의 심정을 이야기하기도 하였는바, 위와 같은 행위로 인해 상당한 수치심을 느꼈을 것으로 보이는 점 등을 종합하여 보면, 피고인이 피해자에 대한 정서적 학대행위를 한 사실이 인정된다고 보아 이 사건 공소사실을 유죄로 판단한 제1심판결을 그대로 유지하였다.

C. Examining the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on emotional abuse in the crime of violating the Act on Welfare of Persons with Disabilities.

3. Conclusion

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