A. Violation of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Child Abuse Crimes (Child Education)

Large scale of death)

(b) Child welfare violations (Child Abuse);

(c) Child Welfare violation (Child-Care);

1. (a). (c) A

2.(c) B

Defendants

C Law Firm

Attorney D, AT, AU, AV, AW (for Defendants),

Gwangju High Court Decision 2015Do388 Decided January 7, 2016

April 15, 2016

All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the records, Defendant A appealed against the judgment of the court of first instance, and asserted only unfair sentencing as to the remainder other than the part on which the court below acquitted the Defendant.

In such a case, the argument that there is an error of mistake in the judgment of the court below shall not be a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, the argument that there was an error of mistake in the part of the lower judgment’s explanation on the grounds of sentencing is that the lower court’s sentencing is unfair. However, pursuant to Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the ground that the sentencing of a sentence is unreasonable may be decided as the grounds for appeal only for the case where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without labor for not less than ten years is declared. In this case where the Defendant was sentenced to a more minor punishment

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court is justifiable to have found Defendant B guilty of this case’s facts charged (excluding the part on which the lower court rendered a not guilty verdict) on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations,

3. In addition, even upon examining records, it is not recognized that the court below's litigation procedure contains an error of law as alleged in the grounds of appeal, and affected the conclusion of the judgment.

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

Justices Kim Shin-chul

Chief Justice Park Poe-dae

Justices Park Young-young

Justices Kim Jong-il