2019Do5797 Indecent Act by compulsion

A person shall be appointed.

Defendant

Law Firm Private Interest Rate

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others

Busan District Court Decision 2018Do3409 Decided April 26, 2019

December 12, 2019

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

A. The probative value of evidence is left to a judge’s free evaluation, but such determination must be consistent with logical and empirical rules. While the degree of formation of conviction to find a defendant guilty in a criminal trial is not likely to be a reasonable doubt, it is not required to exclude all possible doubts, and rejection of evidence acknowledged as probative value is not permissible beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence. Here, the reasonable doubt refers to a reasonable doubt as to the probability of facts inconsistent with facts based on logical and empirical rules, not including all questions and correspondence, but merely means a rational doubt as to the probability of facts that are not compatible with facts, and thus, cannot be said to be included in a rational doubt (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do221, Jun. 25, 2004). Moreover, the victim’s statement is consistent with the substance of the statement, and the court below’s determination of facts is not justified in light of the logical and empirical rule, and there is no reasonable motive or error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the defendant’s testimony and evidence 1810.

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

Justices Kim Yong-hwan.

Justices Park Sang-ok

Lee In-bok and Lee In-chul

Justices Noh Jeong-hee