logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 성남지원 2014.09.17 2014고정701
성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(성적목적공공장소침입)
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. Around 01:20 on December 11, 2013, the Defendant: (a) entered the toilets in women’s toilets in the G1st floor in Sungnam-si, Sungnam-si, for the purpose of meeting his own sexual desire; (b) hiddenly, the Defendant: (c) d1st of the facts charged; (d) d one-storys coming to be melted in the side partitions; and (e) intruded in the public toilets by a method that the string of the trop and the trokes of the trop and the trokes of the trop and the trokes of the trokes in the direction that the trokes of the trokes report on the trokes.

2. Determination

A. On the consistent basis from the police to the above court, the Defendant asserted that he was imprisoned to male toilets due to a sudden change in the time and place indicated in the above facts charged, and entered female public toilets (hereinafter “instant female toilets”) and did not intrude into the above places for the purpose of meeting the sexual desire.

B. The following facts may be acknowledged according to the above evidence, as evidence showing that the defendant intrudes into the location of this case with the intent to satisfy sexual desire, and there are statements in F, E's investigation agency and court, and G's court.

(1) At the time of entry into the instant female toilet at the time stated in F and E’s charged facts, the structure of the toilet at the time of entry is as shown in the attached Form.

(2) The F reported three-dimensionals in the above women's toilets, and E, based on the annexed drawings, deemed the 1-side, 2-side, and 3-use partitions among three-use partitionss (hereinafter referred to as "the first side, 2-use partitions, and 3-use partitions") to the right side from the left side.

(3) F went to the upper end by the Defendant’s head in the first side column through the three-dimensional sclock.

I tried to get out.

On the other hand, in the initial police statement, F correctly considered that the defendant's toilet variable screen is melting the face, but in the court, "F does not have any male toilet."

arrow