logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2015.08.19 2015노1279
아동복지법위반등
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below acquitted the Defendant on the violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc., since it could be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant had repeatedly delivered text messages that cause fear or apprehension to D, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of suspension of execution in August, probation, and community service order of 80 hours) by the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of legal principles

A. On September 20, 2014, at around 11:27, the Defendant sent text messages to the victim D’s cell phone machine using his/her mobile phone devices, including sending text messages with the content that “I am 50 I am am ? I am ? I am ? I am ?” from September 20, 2014 to October 4, 2014, the Defendant sent text messages with the same content as written in the list of crimes in the annexed sheet, including “I am vegetable”, “I am ba,” and “I am vegetable, I am.”

As a result, the Defendant repeatedly sent text messages that cause fears or apprehensions to the victim.

B. (1) Determination (1) Article 74(1)3 and Article 44-7(1)3 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. are punished for repeatedly reaching other parties any codes, words, sound, image, or motion picture that arouses fear or apprehension through an information and communications network. The issue of whether “the act of repeatedly reaching other party, by which the words causing fear or apprehension,” supra, constitutes “the act of repeatedly reaching other party.”

arrow