(영문) 광주고등법원 2017.11.30 2017노370 | 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 2017.11.30 2017노370

성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(친족관계에의한강제추행)등

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Judgment on the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts (the part not guilty in the court below)

A. According to the evidence presented, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the charge of forced indecent act by blood, despite all of the facts charged, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The lower court recognized the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning by comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, and based on this, proved that this part of the facts charged is beyond reasonable doubt.

It is difficult to see

The Court rendered a not-guilty verdict.

Examining the various circumstances cited by the lower court in a thorough and consistent manner with the record, there is no reasonable circumstance to deem that the lower court’s determination of evidence was clearly erroneous or that the argument leading to the acknowledgement of facts is significantly unfair due to the violation of logical and empirical rules.

We do not accept the Prosecutor’s assertion that the lower judgment erred by mistake in fact on the premise different from this premise.

2. Where there exists no change in the sentencing conditions compared to the original judgment regarding the unfair argument of sentencing, and the sentencing of the original judgment does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion, it shall be respected (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260, Jul. 23, 2015). In this case, in full view of the following: (a) the legal representative of the victim (the former denial of the defendant) (the prior denial of the defendant); (b) the victim was able to use the defendant, and the victim seems to have been in contact again with the defendant; (c) the other person of the defendant also seems to have announced the social relationship of the defendant, such as seeking the defendant’s wife; and (d) the defendant had no criminal record exceeding the fine; and (c) the sentencing conditions indicated in the records and arguments of this case, including the fact that the defendant was not guilty and has exceeded the reasonable scope of discretion.

shall not be deemed to exist.

A prosecutor who deals with the propriety of sentencing of the court below.

참조판례

-대법원 2015. 7. 23. 선고 2015도3260 전원합의체 판결

유사 판례

-광주고등법원 2017.11.30 2017노347

-광주고등법원 2017.07.27 2017노110

-광주고등법원 2017.10.26 2017노272

-광주고등법원 2017.11.23 2017노330

-광주고등법원 2017.11.09 2017노408