logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2018.07.20 2018노390
강제추행
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of legal principles and improper sentencing)

A. Legal principles are as follows: (a) the Defendant misunderstanding the legal principles were tightly sealed with the victim E, spawn with a spawn and spawn with a spawn and spawn with the victim F; and (b) the victim F should not put his body into the spawn and spawn with his body; (c) the Defendant did not assault or threaten him

In addition, even if there was such physical contact, it does not go against social norms, so it does not constitute a crime of indecent act or there is no illegality.

B. Even if the sentencing was found guilty, the lower court’s punishment (amounting to KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. We examine ex officio the defendant's argument of reasons for appeal prior to the determination of ex officio.

Article 56(1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018; Article 56(1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which uniformly provides for the restriction on employment of children and juveniles-related institutions, etc. for a period of ten years for each defendant of the case, taking into account the seriousness of the crime and the risk of recidivism, etc., upon sentencing the punishment for each sex offense, the court shall set a differential period of employment within the scope of ten years for each defendant of the case. Article 3 of the Addenda to the above Act provides that Article 56 of the Act shall apply to persons who committed a sex offense before July 17, 2018, which is the date the above Act enters into force, and thus, the above amended Act shall also apply to this case.

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the legal principles as to the judgment of the court below is still subject to the judgment of the court, and this is examined below.

B. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, compulsory indecent act under the Criminal Act is objectively committed to the general public.

arrow