beta
Text
Defendant
In addition, all appeals filed by the respondent for attachment order and the prosecutor are dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Regarding the facts stated in Article 1-A of the judgment of the court below, the defendant and the person subject to a request to attach an attachment order (hereinafter only referred to as the "defendant") 1), the defendant attempted to engage in a sexual intercourse against the victim E, but the defendant suspended and attempted to commit a sexual intercourse with the victim E, and the defendant, with regard to the facts stated in Article 1-B (b) of the judgment of the court below, although there was no fact that the defendant inserted a sexual organ into the victim's resistance, the court below's conviction of this part of the facts charged against the defendant on the sole ground of the victim's statement without credibility was erroneous in the misconception of facts and affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) When considering the various sentencing conditions of unfair sentencing, the court below's punishment (five years of imprisonment, etc.) against the defendant is too unreasonable.
B. A prosecutor 1) Taking into account the various sentencing conditions of unfair sentencing, the lower court’s sentence against the Defendant is too uneasible and unreasonable. 2) The lower court’s dismissal of the Defendant’s request for an attachment order even if the Defendant’s assertion on the attachment order is recognized as the risk of repeating
2. Determination
A. Part 1 of the defendant's case is that the degree of the formation of a conviction to find the defendant guilty in a criminal trial is to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt, but to the extent that it does not require that all possible doubts be excluded. The reasonable doubt here refers to a reasonable doubt as to the probability of a fact that is not compatible with the facts requiring proof in accordance with logical and empirical rules, not including any doubt and correspondence, and it merely refers to a reasonable doubt based on conceptual or abstract possibility, and such doubt cannot be deemed as included in a rational doubt.
Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2221 Decided June 25, 2004, Supreme Court Decision 2004Do362 Decided April 15, 2005, and Supreme Court Decision 2004Do362 Decided April 27, 201.