logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주고등법원 (전주) 2020.05.22 2019노222
아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강제추행)
Text

The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

For the defendant 40 hours.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Prosecutor 1) In light of the misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, the victim C (the name, the age of 17, the leisure), the victim’s victim’s service period (from March 30, 2018 to April 11, 2018), and the lower court’s conviction of indecent act by force (the date of the crime, March 30, 2018; April 3, 2018; April 4, 2018; April 11, 2018), etc., where the lower court found the Defendant guilty of indecent act by force on the victim even on April 5, 2018; April 6, 2018; and April 10, 2018; however, it is sufficiently recognized that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the grounds that there is insufficient evidence to support the specific facts charged, and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine for a period of two years and one-year suspension of employment (the period of imprisonment).

B. Defendant 1) In light of the fact-finding that the lower court found Defendant 1 guilty on March 30, 2018, April 3, 2018, and April 4, 2018, and April 11, 2018, the evidence that conforms to each of the facts charged by indecent act as of April 11, 2018 is only the victim’s statement, but there is no credibility because there is a lot of contradiction in the victim’s statement, the victim appears to have made verbal abuse from the Defendant, and there is no doubt that the Defendant committed a sex offense, and thus, the lower court’s conviction on this part of the facts charged by the Defendant is erroneous of mistake of facts. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing is unreasonable because it is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts, the first instance court held that “the defendant committed an indecent act against the juvenile, by force, on the part of the facts charged, following the following circumstances as stated in its reasoning: “The victim committed an indecent act against the juvenile, by force, on the part of the victim’s chest, between the Defendant and the 18:00 each on April 5, 2018, April 6, 2018, and April 10, 2018 through April 10, 2018 and 23:00 each on April 10, 2018.”

arrow