(영문) 서울고등법원 2018.05.17 2018노350 | 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) 서울고등법원 2018.05.17 2018노350

아동ㆍ청소년의성보호에관한법률위반(강제추행)등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the Defendant did not only deal with the victim D’s bucks, bucks, etc.

The victim's statement is inconsistent with the E and F's statement, and the part of the statement about the background of the indecent act and the method of prosecution by the defendant is inconsistent with the rule of experience, so there is no credibility.

B. The sentence of the lower court (two years of imprisonment, 40 hours of completion of sexual assault treatment programs) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the facts and circumstances alleged in the reasoning of the judgment below are all justified, and considering the following facts and circumstances that can be recognized by the evidence, it can be fully recognized that the defendant was able to confirm the victim's bucks, prevent the victim from being injured by hand and pande the victim's panty because the victim refused to do so, and only the victim's panty part of the facts charged can be fully recognized.

The defendant's assertion of mistake or misunderstanding of legal principles is without merit.

A) On June 26, 2017, the victim of the forced indecent act was under the contact with the Defendant’s house from his male-friendly job offering F, and E went to the Defendant’s house with the Defendant.

The injured party was a defendant, E, F, and drinking time game at the home of the accused, and dyp 4 to 6 maws in this place.

From 05:00 to F and E enter the room first, the victim and the defendant enter the room, and they also sleep in one room.

At around 07:20, the victim's cell phones sounded all the bells in divings, E and F have dried tobacco, coming out of the house, and the defendant and the victim left the house of the defendant.

At this time, the victim was expected to be a cooling body in the state of a monmonist in the ward.

B) The credibility of the victim’s statement is (1).

유사 판례

-대전고등법원 (청주) 2016.06.30 2016노26

-서울고등법원 2018.12.14 2018노1845

-서울남부지방법원 2018.03.29 2016노2641

-서울고등법원 2021.01.22 2020노1659

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.05.20 2015노4802