logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2020.05.14 2020도2433
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(친족관계에의한강제추행)등
Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (Indecent act by force against minors under the age of 13), and the violation of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse

A. Articles 307(1) and 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act provide that fact-finding shall be based on evidence, and the probative value of evidence shall be based on the free judgment of the judge. This means that a judge’s adoption and use of necessary evidence and evaluation of the substantial value of evidence constitutes a judge’s free evaluation of evidence.

Therefore, insofar as it is not contrary to logical and empirical rules by rejecting evidence with sufficient probative value without reasonable grounds or by adopting and using evidence clearly contrary to objective facts without reasonable grounds, a judge can recognize facts by adopting evidence with free evaluation evidence.

(2) In order to determine the credibility of a statement when a minor victim made a statement that he/she was subject to sexual assault, such as rape or indecent act by force, from his/her relatives in the position to protect and supervise him/her, the victim, even though he/she was aware of the absence of a witness in addition to his/her own statement, has expressed the fact of sexual harm on his/her own at the risk of criminal punishment of his/her guardian, and the motive or reason for making such a statement is not clearly revealed. In addition, if the contents of the statement are factual and specific, consistent, and there are no parts inconsistent or inconsistent in the statement in light of the empirical rule, the credibility of the statement shall not be dismissed without permission, provided that the victim, even though he/she was aware of the absence of a witness in addition to his/her own statement, has clearly expressed the motive or reason to make a false statement.

arrow