logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2015.01.14 2014고단2328
강제추행
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On April 2, 2014, the Defendant: (a) around 00:40 on April 2, 2014, the charge was committed by the Defendant with four male employees, E, etc., and with the victim F. of female-friendly job offers (30 years of age) of the above E, with four male employees, E, etc., and her singing together; (b) he was seated on the side of the victim, and the victim tried to sit again; (c) reported the victim’s mind to have indecent act by force; (d) placed the victim’s own hand floor at the place where the victim wants to sit, and committed an indecent act by force against the victim by force.

2. The burden of proof for the criminal facts prosecuted in a criminal trial for judgment is to be borne by the prosecutor, and the conviction should be based on the evidence of probative value, which makes the judge feel true to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, so long as there is no such evidence, the suspicion of guilt is between the defendant, even if there is no such evidence.

Even if there is no choice but to judge the interests of the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do2823 Decided August 21, 2001, etc.). According to the evidence revealed during the trial process of this case, F is recognized that the Defendant, who was on the instant case, was in contact with his hand and F’s son, was placed on the side of the Defendant’s singing at a singing room where multiple persons had come to sing and going to sing in order to sing, thereby holding the Defendant again in a singing room, and he was in contact with the Defendant’s son and F’s son (the Defendant also affixed to this contact itself). However, the Defendant was placed on the side where the Defendant’s hand tried to sit F with his hand from the police to the court, and the Defendant did not intentionally commit an indecent act against F, and thus denies the facts charged.

However, there are statements in F's investigative agencies and courts as evidence that correspond to the facts charged in this case, but F's statement in the first police statement is intended for the defendant's hand on the F's job.

arrow