(영문) 광주고등법원 2018.02.08 2017노492 | 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) 광주고등법원 2018.02.08 2017노492

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자위계등간음)등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty on the ground that the Defendant had no sexual intercourse with the victim as stated in the instant facts charged, by dependent on the victim’s statement with no credibility.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal

A. In a case where there are no new objective grounds that could affect the formation of a conviction during the appellate court’s trial process, and where there are no reasonable grounds to deem that the first instance court’s determination was clearly erroneous or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts is considerably unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules, etc., the judgment on the acknowledgement of facts in the first instance shall not be reversed without permission (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do18031, Mar. 22, 2017). The Defendant asserted that this part of the grounds for appeal are the same, and the lower court’s determination on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel is “a determination on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel.”

2. Determination

A. The decision of the court below was rejected in detail. This argument was rejected.

There is no reasonable ground to deem that it is remarkably unfair to maintain the judgment as it is in violation of logical and empirical rules that the judgment of evidence was clearly erroneous or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts was against the logical and empirical rules.

In addition, there is no objective reason to affect the formation of a documentary evidence even in the trial process of a court.

The lower judgment did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged in the Defendant, and thus, this part of the Defendant’s assertion is rejected.

B. The instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing was not only the Defendant’s sexual intercourse and forced indecent act.

참조판례

-대법원 2017. 3. 22. 선고 2016도18031 판결

유사 판례

-광주고등법원 2018.01.11 2017노431

-광주고등법원 2017.11.09 2017노275

-인천지방법원 2018.05.18 2017노3739

-광주고등법원 2018.08.30 2018노207

-광주고등법원 2017.06.01 2017노4